Pure Stock Muscle Car Drag Race

[Chevy454]

So, anyone heading to Michigan for this event September 8 & 9?

I wish I had attended the Factory Stock Race in Ohio this past spring and gotten to see Hassett wring out that ZL-1! He ran mid-high 13s, but it was a COLD day and his first time out with the car.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Rob:
Neal Robbins is attending with his '68 L89 Nova SS to unseat Phil Brewer's L89 Nova from last year. In test runs, Neal was running 12.50's at 112 mph. Pretty good for a stock engine with stock cam, I imagine he will run even better in Stanton, MI this weekend.

Neal has been the only guy to run his '70 Yenko Nova at this event, including a few heads up runs against Pete Simpson's Canadian COPO Nova. The Yenko ran respectible 13.80's at 103 mph after fighting massive wheelspin all the way through 3rd gear. This Yenko Nova has run a best of 13.45 at 106 mph with cool dry air, and better traction. Hope to see more Yenko and COPO cars this year.
M

[JoeC]

Good Luck Rob. I hope you get the Chevelle into the 12's. Let us know what times you ran.

[JSC83]

Hey now......I did cut some pretty good lights though. I know you were not putting me down or anything I'm just joking around. Besides if I wasn't I could just take you out on the basketball court and whip you both to get even. *cough* yea right *cough*

Jonathan



P.S. Hope you guys don't mention my red lights.

[sYc]

The Yellow Yenko Camaro's best was a 13.70, not as good as last year when we ran 13.20s, but OK, since most of the driving was done by my youngest son Jonathan, who began his racing career at this year's reunion. Also, with the reunion right before the event, we did not spend the time we should have to get the car ready, but enough excuses. We never could get the LS-6 to pull hard on the top end, so it really suffered. We suspect ignition problems, but have not had time to troubleshoot. But, with all of this going on, we still had a great time. The highlight was on Saturday, when a TV crew from SpeedVision spent the day filming us and our cars. They followed us around as we raced/worked on the cars, they interviewed us all and even put an announcer and camera in the Yenko as it made a pass. As per the other cars, 2 of the faster cars, both Novas, were not allowed to qualify. I heard that it had to do with their aluminum heads.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Neal L89 Nova couldn't 60 foot at this track, so he was running 12.70's at 113 mph. I heard the Yellow Yenko was running high 13' to low 14's?? How about the LS6?? What happened to Brewer's Nova? Trailered?
M

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Not bad times Jonathan! It won't be long before you are running in the 12.90's like Peter Simpson's COPO Camaro. Pete says the biggest improvement on his car was staying on top of the jets when the temperature/humidity changes, and of course traction in the first 60 feet.

Good Luck,
Marlin

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

I understand that if a car had aluminum heads on it, then it was pulled out and requested that a valve cover be pulled. One Nova would not pull its cover, the other voluntarily removed itself from the race and only ran time trials. The third alum. head Nova ran without protest.

I expect that the organizers will be suspect towards any car that currently runs in the NMCA - B.F. Goodrich classes, as many of them are capable of running in the 12.0's. Supposedly, if they run 11.99 or faster NMCA will disqualify them!

I look forward to a fun event next year, and hope to see more Yenko cars there.
Marlin



[Edited by YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY (09-22-2000 at 08:15 AM).]

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Rob:
Did you find anything out with your LS6 now that you have looked it over after the race? Any problems, or just lack of traction?
M

[Chevy454]

M:

Well, I did find one thing out about the LS-6...IT'S GONE!!!!

After many hours of thought, I let the car go, as my ultimate goal has been to find a Yenko Chevelle...so, hopefully in the near future, I can give those pesky Buicks @ the Pure Stock Drags a taste of their own medicine (an A-body taking on the "other" A-bodies!). Simpson's COPO Chevelle has gone 12's numerous times, so 12's aren't a totally absurd number. I figure if the Buicks can go 12.40s with 8.5:1 compression, then what can I do with 11:1? Maybe I can con some of those "other" A-body guys into giving me some chassis tips http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/wink.gif.

As far as the NSCA "Factory Pure Stock" class, it's essentially a 12.0 bracket class cause 11.99 and quicker requires a cage. But, I hope to have a car (Y-Chevelle?) that I can run both the PSMCDR & the NSCA events with, and give the fans an idea what these Supercars are all about!

I'm not sure about all the "hub-bub" with the Novas...all I know is that Jimmie J was PISSED! I saw where he got DQ'ed from the NSCA event the following weekend as well! I bet he was HOT! He told me the reason he couldn't run at the PSMCDR was that he had later aluminum heads on. He said they were GM Performance parts heads, which were a copy of the original head, but the exhaust valve was like .004" bigger and the exhaust(?) port was like <10 cc's smaller...something like that.

[Rowdy Rat]

I have a question that's been bugging the heck out of me ever since the Pure Stock Drags last year. What's up with the 1968 L-89 Novas? Chevy production records show a grand total of zero built, yet there seems to be a push to get these cars recognized as a factory built vehicle. A story about the car that "won" the event last year appeared in Musclecar Review and claimed that a handful of L-89 Novas were built in 1968, yet the person that was quoted as confirming this story told me that he never said anything of the sort and was as surprised as anyone when the story appeared. Marlin, I know that you follow the Novas pretty closely and your buddy Neal has one of these cars... Any thoughts on this? Does anyone know what documentation was presented to allow these cars to run (was any even asked for)? I'd really like to know what the real story is on these cars (as well as the 311 1969 L-89 Novas that were supposed to have been built).

Thanks in advance for any information.

Regards,

Stan

[Edited by Rowdy Rat (09-22-2000 at 03:51 PM).]

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Stan:
The guideline that is followed at the PS-Drags is that the Gibb Novas were the first L78 / TH400 cars built in late June and early July of 68. If a person shows up with an L89 / TH400 car that is after the 1st or 2nd week of July '68, then they are allowed to run. This is because the Gibb cars are used as a starting point, assuming that since the combination was 'available' in '69, the combination would have been available as a non-COPO option starting the 2nd or 3rd week of July '68 - right after Gibb got the ball rolling.

How many, if any, did they make? Nobody knows! Neals car is the 3rd or 4th week of July, therefore it is allowed to run. Four speed cars do not have a date requirement.

The Johnston car got trailered because of open chambered heads, which is why he would not pull a valve cover. There was actually a fourth L89 Nova there, he got trailered because the engine was essentially an L88 built up engine. Brewer's Nova set this up after he ran the big number last year, otherwise there would not have been such a stir about these cars. Neal and Johnson were supposed to be there last year as well, but neither could get the bugs worked out. If they would have been there last year, Brewer might have gotten trailered!!

Hope this helps!!
M

[Chevy454]

I sort of "hinted around" at the '68 L-89/auto thing last year whenever Brewer was running his ultra-low 12s. When I asked the guys in the Brewer camp, they kind of danced around the subject, and when I asked "how many?" they said "not very many". It didn't really matter to me, kind of a technicality thing, but a rule all the same.

So, M, you are saying that the L-89/auto combo is legal ONLY in a '69 car? That's the way I read above, but I'm not sure if I read it right! But, that's how I think it should be.

Here is something that puzzles me, though...I can name the cars that have not been allowed to run or asked not to come back, and they are all Chevys. Seem odd? The good thing about Chevys is that they are GREAT cars and they run like RAPED APES, but everyone kind of knows whats right and whats not. So, maybe I should get a Buick...

[JoeC]

Hey Rob - why race a Yenko Chevelle? I love them but its not the best choice for the drag strip with it's extra weight and high drag coefficient. To go up against that Hemi that ran a 12.2 You need the biggest gun Chevy had to offer. You NEED a ZL1 Corvette! Check this article I scanned for a post on the Corvette Forum. Its from Motor Trend Oct. 1969.

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/ViewPhoto?u=1169942&a=8610132&p=28801766

[Edited by JoeC (09-23-2000 at 03:02 AM).]

[Chevy454]

Joe:

I agree that the ZL-1 'Vette would be the perfect candidate for this event (dad and I have been thinking of this combo for a while). But, here's my "problem" with this combo...IT WOULD NOT BE A REAL CAR! There were only 2 of these 'Vettes made, and even IF I could afford to buy one of these cars, they probably aren't for sale. In my eyes, this event was made for people with these cars, not that people should make cars for this event (that's probably my biggest vice of the whole event).

Plus, this is the one time that weight is really an ADVANTAGE. On repro tires, you need all the help you can get. Heck, the guy with the '64 Mopar w/wedge had 300+ pounds of lead, plus some tires thrown in the trunk! And no faster than these cars are going, I don't really think drag comes into the picture (I am thinking that I read that unless you were 120+ there was really not much of an advantage). These races are won in the first 60 feet. It seems the Buicks don't have a problem using a virtual twin of a Chevelle...heck, a Buick won this year's event, and placed second last year.

M:

I'm still not sure of the whole '68 L-89/auto thing...Gibb's cars were iron headed autos, not aluminum headed...Gibb did get the 400th ball rolling, but I still think the aluminum heads are pretty "iffy". Now, I know this is a technicallity and there is virtually NO DIFFERENCE between a '68 and a '69, but that's kind of how I see it.

I feel sometimes that I am just wasting my time worrying about what to do to my cars to run well there, when I know good and well that others aren't playing by the rules. But, that's racing, and you have to take the good with the bad. You don't know how close I came to building a ZL-1 'Vette to go out and totally blow the record away...but then I would be just like some of the others...I would have a non-real car, and I would have went to the event for the wrong reason. Plus, when I roll in with a Yenko Chevelle, then people will come look at the car no matter what time it is running!

[JoeC]

Rob, I was joking about the ZL1. Even if one was for sale it would probably be over 1M. I would like to see you race a Yenko Chevelle against the Buicks but the Corvettes have a few advantages. Its always better to add weight where you need it then to start out with a heavier car. I was talking with some friends (Camaro guys) about what would be the hot setup for pure stock and we came up with the Corvette. There wasn't a 70 LS6 Corvette and the 71 LS6 lost a few HP with lower comp. We thought the best candidate would be a 1969 L71/L89 with TH400 and 4:10 rear (no power accessories) but even an all iron L71 would do well. The 3x2 carb setup is tricky but some guys did run them and I think they flow 1100cfm. The Corvette exhaust manifolds are less restrictive then the Camaro and the long pipes with mufflers all the way to rear is a little better then the Camaro tailpipes. The Corvette has better weight distribution. The stock tires were F70x15 vs the Yenko Camaro E70's. I tried to make an argument for the Yenko Chevelle with its F70x15 tires, four link/coil rear suspension, and the nice L72 high rise intake is worth a few HP but I couldn't sway the Jury.

[COPO]

One of the fastest stock vettes in the 1/4 was the '66 L-72. Having owned a '67 427/435, I know the single four is a lot easier to tune than the 3 dueces. The '66 just does not look as mean. Seems like a well tuned 69 Camaro w/ZL-1 and turbo 400 would do quite well. Any volunteers?

[JoeC]

The 66 Corvette had the HP but with the skinny stock tires it wouldn't have the traction IMO. Like Rob said you need a good 60' time to win. The ZL1 Camaro with it's 850 Holley DP has a lot of potential. In that orignal road test of the Yellow Berger ZL1 it ran 13.16 at 110.21 Too badd Chevy clogged it up with those exhuast manifolds that were designed for the 396's. They don't even look like they match the exhaust ports of the ZL1 heads very well.

[Chevy454]

I'm not sure which 'Vette I would choose, but I will have to wholeheartedly agree that one of them would be the best candidate to "raise the bar" at the PSMCDR. Dad and I thought maybe ZL-1 or L-88...they have no aircleaner, you could run a steep gear (like 4.56 or 4.88), the free flowing exhaust (like mentioned above), transistorized ignition, IRS w/posi, light weight, etc. I was also thinking that they came with 60 series tires, would be a HUGE advantage if they did. It would be KILLER!

We also looked at an L-72 Corvette recently, and upon doing some research, found a time of 12.6 on a list of 50 fastest musclecars. I think this would be better than the 3x2, as it would be easier to tune, and a lot less finicky. It's kind of like the 440 vs. Hemi...when all is right, the Hemi is king...but what a pain to tune! (at least that's what I have heard)

I'm not after the #1 spot (it would be nice, though!), I just want to have a good showing, and show what a well tuned STOCK car can do. Another thing to consider is that you are supposed to use era parts, which means the aluminum parts are a little risky. Can you imagine trashing an original ZL-1 block/heads? OUCH! The new versions are supposed to be the same (the new ZL-1 blocks are supposed to be beefed a little) but they say they won't allow them.

[JoeC]

What size tire will the rules allow for the '66 L72 Corvette? I was looking at one at a show and it had very narrow tires. With a 4sp and 4:10's it would make tire smoke like an old front engine digger.

[Chevy454]

I'm not sure but I'm sure they would be skinny! They had really narrow tires on them.

[Rowdy Rat]

I guess I'm with Rob on the Nova issue. I have no doubt about the Harrell COPO cars, but just beacause a Nova is an L-78/M-40 car doesn't mean it is an L-89 car too. Regardless, I'm not making the rules or running the event (probably a good thing - they seem to be doing very well without my input!), so that is obviously their decision to make. Still, I'd like to know what information they used to make this determination.

As far as the tire sizes on the 1966 - 1969 Corvettes, I'm pretty certain that the 66-67 cars used a 7.75 x 15 tire on a 6" wide wheel which, as Joe mentioned, is really narrow. All of the 68-69 cars used an F70 x 15 tire on 7" wheels in 1968 and 8" wheels in 1969.

A 1969 ZL-1/late L-88 would be an interesting combination. Corvettes of that era weren't exactly light, but the weight distribution was quite good even with the big block. The exhaust manifolds are a much better design than the Camaro/Nova style, but they still don't work very well with that camshaft. Exhaust pipes on all 69 Corvettes were 2" (!), but I think the rules allow 2.5" regardless of what was installed originally. What do the rules allow as far as rear axle ratio? If you have to stick with available ratios, that pretty much rules out a ZL-1/M-40 combination (or late L-88/L-89/L-71 for that matter) because the lowest (highest numerical) gearset you could get with the automatic was a 3.36 while the ZL-1/L-88 four speed cars were available with a 4.56. Still, that ZL-1/M-22 car would be a nice combination!

I guess I have to side with Rob on this issue too. I'd rather see a real car out there running than a "tibute car" no matter how close it is to the real thing so maybe building a car just to win the event isn't the best idea.

Regards,

Stan

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Rob/Stan:
I wasn't saying that any '68 Nova L78 built after the 2nd week of July is an L89!! The logic is that after Gibb started the L78/TH400 combination, the L89 option was 'possible'. Whether they made any or not is unknown. I also didn't mean to insinuate that the Gibb cars were light-headed, they weren't. But it is unknown if any got changed over to light heads before being sold/distributed by Gibb.

I agree that I would rather see the real deal at the race as compared to the 'tribute, fake, or clone' cars.

M

[Edited by YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY (09-25-2000 at 10:12 AM).]

[JoeC]

I wonder why the '69 Nova was not used. I don't know if any were made but it seems more likely that there would have been some 1969 L78/L89 TH400 Nova's sold then in 1968. I base this on the numbers for 1969 L78/L89 Camaro and Chevelle production numbers. A very late '69 Nova would even have a 402.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

JoeC;
Of the 4 L89 Novas that showed up at this year's event, I believe that two are late '68's and 2 are '69's.
M

[sYc]

A couple of items of note. A Harrell car, such as Ray Morrison's, is not legal, or a Gibb car that would have had al. heads added, as the cars are supposed to be FACTORY stock. Dealer prep cars, at least Chevys, are not legal. We were told to change our 7-15 Torque Thursts to 7-15 Rallys, which we did. I have never understood the exception for the al. headed '68s. Also, a Yenko Nova, such as our '69, is not legal. If we get into "POSSIBLE", the sky is the limit, since Chevy has not released key records. Just look at the many COPO stories out there, including a 1969 427 Yenko Nova. Hey, that is a thought, maybe our Nova is legal, since the Red car Kevin S. has been reported as a COPO 427 car. The event is a fun event, but is starting to be overwhelmed by all of the bickering. I have suggested having two classes, one for the true factory stock cars, that are truly the way that were when new from the factory and the owners are there just to show/enjoy their cars, such as Mark Hassett in his ZL-1, and another class, stock appearring, for the serious racers who have built/designed their cars for the event. Each class would be fun to watch, as it would be a chance to see pure stock cars run against each other AND a chance to see what some of the cars can do with a little race prep. Tom

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Tom/Rob;
No offense on the L89 discussion, I only know their background because I asked the same questions that you guys are asking! It is a difficult subject, if GM offered L89's in '69 then why couldn't they be offered in '68? This is the problem that confronts the race organizers, how do they separate these kinds of cars from the pack when they don't have the time or knowledge to pick them apart? The line was drawn specifically on the '68 L89 Novas (and Camaros, had one shown up), that had a TH400. This is because it is known that GM did not offer a solid lifter/TH400 combo until the Gibb cars.

The race is a premier event, and is a ton of fun. The competitiveness still causes owners to 'overprep' their cars, good thing there is no money to win!! It is not just the Chevy's; I know that the Buick cars are 'different', I watched as Chamberlain (12.57 @ 109mph in '98)changed his rear tires to sticky meats out in the back of the pits!! They asked him to change them back, but how many owners do this stuff after tech. and don't get caught? Everbody knows that Karakashian's Super Bee was an NHRA record holder in the early '80s, and Joe Mino's Firebird is a prep car, and the SuperCharged Studee is actually 'over-the-counter' built, and the 440 6-Pak, plum crazy cuda convertible and '69 T/A convertible were clones, and.....you get the point!! There is no way for the organizer's to police this event, and make everyone happy. Maybe two classes is the way to go, but how do they decide which class your car should be in? I wouldn't want to be the judge.

Most of the guys I have spoken with agree that the great equalizer is the tires, because the races are won and lost in the first 60 feet, and at the tree. I believe that the cars that have gotten trailered had siginificant mod's done to the springs, bushings ect. and were rightfully denied. I know that if you slip past the tech's, and your hood shoots to the stars at the launch and never comes down till you pull your foot out of it, they will ask that you not bring that car back the following year.

Bottom line for me is that I think they do a great job at this event. 95% of the cars are truly stock, but it only takes 5% to turn this thing against itself. The event has really grown, and it is hard to catch those 5%. I can't wait to take my car there, and hope that I can tree one them!!

Marlin

[sYc]

Marlin; I agree, it is THE premeir event for factory stock racing, as Dan and Bob put in a lot of long hours to make this a fun event. We hope to attend many more with all of our Yenkos. But, it is kind of discouraging when Rob in our Yenko is out ran by the Studdee you mention. We do not mind getting beat, as they were a lot of legal cars there that were faster then us, but I would just like to see everyone play by the same rules. I hope you get to attend the 2001 event with your car and have a great time, but lets have this same conversation after you take a rare, original musclecar to the event and go up against some of the questionable cars. Watch out for that Studdee, it is LOUD and runs well. Good luck and good racing, and yes, good luck at the tree. Tom

[GMH454]

You guys are SO lucky. Problem with all racing is rules. Cheating has always been part of motor racing, still is. I think you have to be happy that you are a classic enthusiast first racer second and not the other way around.
Easy to say from here not sure how I'd be coming second to the studdie though.
Couple of editing notes on past comments, L-88s have air cleaners, they are built into the bonnets, and that famous road test of the L-72 Vette is suspicious as Duntov was on hand, seen in the photos. Car probably built in R & D not the factory. 12s with 3.36
not bad if you can do it.

[GMH454]

You guys are SO lucky.(if i bring a car I have to boat it not trailer it) Problem with all racing is rules. Cheating has always been part of motor racing, still is. I think you have to be happy that you are a classic enthusiast first racer second and not the other way around.
I honestly think a lot of people are happy to see clones go hard at it, but also appreciate the chance to see real cars.
Easy to say from here not sure how I'd be coming second to the studdie though.
Couple of editing notes on past comments, L-88s have air cleaners, they are built into the bonnets, and that famous road test of the L-72 Vette is suspicious as Duntov was on hand, seen in the photos. Car probably built in R & D not the factory. 12s with 3.36
not bad if you can do it.

[Chevy454]

M:

I hope I didn't sound "testy" in any above statements above...it's hard to transmit "tone" on a bulletin board, which makes discussion sometimes tricky. But anyway, like I said above, a '68 is a twin to a '69, so it is a minor "problem" if their are '68s running those "shiny" heads. How did Neal's weekend turn out? I remember watching, but for the life of me, I can't remember if he or Simpson won! I know they pair you up by et's, but wouldn't be cool if they could line you up against a different make, also? Simpson's COPO cars had to run each other last year...he drove all those miles just to race his own car! But, that's part of it I guess.

Also, here is a link to the PSMCDR for future reference: http://www.geocities.com/psmcdr/

As far as the 'Vette issue goes, just stayed tuned...it's on it's way... http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/wink.gif

[Edited by Chevy454 (09-25-2000 at 12:50 PM).]

[JoeC]

on the subject of 1969 Corvette gear ratios;
was the RPO ZQ9 available on the dealer order blank like on the 1969 Camaro? The Camaro order blank has a box for the RPO ZQ9 and under that a space thats says " Special ratio, see power team chart & write ratio below". Then if you look up a L78 Camaro in the power team chart you can select up to a 4:10 ratio. I believe this was factory installed not dealer installed. This RPO ZQ9, if available on the Corvette, can help build a good drag car.

[Rowdy Rat]

Joe,

I'm afraid that I don't have a 1969 Corvette standard order form close by, but if I remember correctly, the form is very similar to the standard Camaro form you are referring to. The code ZQ9 that you mention is most likely the standard rear axle available with a given engine/transmission combination (the ZQ code was used to designate standard equipment - for the 1969 Corvette ZQ3 was the base 350/300 engine, ZQ4 was the standard black vinyl interior, etc.). Any deviations from the standard gear ratio would be noted on the order form.

Available rear axle ratios for the 1969 Corvette ranged from 2.73 to 4.56 to 1, although not all gear ratios were available for a given engine. The solid lifter big blocks equipped with manual transmissions typically received the widest range available; for an L-71 or L-89 car with an M-21, this would include a 3.36 (economy), 3.55 (standard), 3.70 (performance), and 4.11 (special). The L-88 or ZL-1 Corvettes with M-22s would have all of the previously mentioned ratios available plus the 4.56 (special). For the L-71/L-89/L-88/ZL-1 cars backed by the M-40 automatic, the gear ratios were cosiderablly restricted (much more so than with the L-72/L-78 cars in the rest of the Chevrolet line up). Available ratios included a 2.73 (economy), 3.08 (standard), and a 3.36 (performance).

The high performance automatic transmission Corvettes are quite rare; I believe the general figure quoted for the solid lifter 1969 M-40 cars is 255 L-71s and L-89s plus an additional 17 installed in L-88s. I'm not sure that the automatic car would be the best choice for a completely stock drag car due to the relatively tall rear axle ratio you'd be stuck with. Hot Rod tested an L-88/M-40 convertible back in 1969 and turned a respectable 13.5 @ 111 or so, but even they complained about the 3.36 rear. Of course, if the rules allow ANY rear axle ratio available, then you just might have something!

Hope this information helps.

Regards,

Stan

[Charley Lillard]

I used to have a 68 L78 Chevelle with 488 gears, M22 and a Window Sticker showing it came that way. It is now in the Chicago area. Good candidate ?

[JoeC]

I misread the '69 Camaro order form. You are right Stan. There appears to be four selections under the "AXLE, REAR" heading. RPO's G80, ZQ8, ZQ9 and the fourth box is the blank space to write in a ratio. Then the power team chart has four columes Std, Econ, Perf, and Spec. My question is if you could have writen in "4:11" on the Corvette order blank for a TH400 L71/L89 or L88 or ZL1 would it be factory installed or dealer installed? I do not have a power team chart for the 1969 Corvette. The 1969 Camaro Power Team Chart goes up to 4:10 and the '68 and '67 goes up to 4:88. One book lists a 1969 Camaro COPO #9511 code DT 4:56 rear.
Maybe the '68 Chevelle Charley had was ordered by writing in the ratio. Yes Charley that 68 Chevelle would have been a "Contenddaa"

[Rowdy Rat]

Joe,

I'm sure that any available ratio could have been written in, but I doubt that it would have done any good without some sort of central office override. The Corvette power team chart shows a 3.36 rear as the only "performance" ratio available with the L-71/L-89/L-88 and M-40, with no "special" ratios available. For whatever reason, the engineers decided that the most aggressive rear axle ratio a person could get in a Corvette with an automatic and one of the the solid lifter engines was a 3.36. They even created a special broadcast code (AX) for this application even though a "big block" 3.36 rear already existed (although to my knowledge, there is no physical difference between the two). What I was never able to understand is why the higher numerical ratios were never offered. The COPO Camaros and Chevelles could get a 4.10 (maybe even a 4.56) as you stated. Plus, there was no doubt that the L-88/M-40 cars were built solely to make that combination legal for stock class drag racing, so why saddle the car with a rear gear totally unsuitable for its intended purpose.

For general information, the transmission used is nearly identical to the COPO Camaro/Chevelle/Nova THM400s although the Corvette version carried a "CY" broadcast code.

I've been fortunate to see quite a few of these automatic transmission L-71/L-89/L-88 Corvettes in person and with only one exception, the cars all had the 3.36 rear (the one car that did not was an L-89 with a 3.08). I've heard recently of an L-89/M-40 car with a 3.70 rear axle (supposedly with paperwork), but I have not seen any documentation to this point. If I ever get to see the car and the paperwork, I'll let you know what I discover.

Charley, that Chevelle, sounds like a great combination! It also sounds like you've had (and still have) some really outstanding cars!

Regards,

Stan

[Charley Lillard]

The Chevelle was Grotto Blue with Parchment bucket interior, manual steering, guages, no colsole. It even showed Simulated Mag Wheel covers on the Window Sticker. It went to Dave Simpsom in St. Charles Ill. Most of his collection was bought by Mecum auctions about a year ago then resold. The current owner only has a copy of the Window sticker. Simpson either lost or kept the orig. one. What a shame.

[sixtiesmuscle]

Re: the availability of taller gears in L71, etc. vettes, could the engineers have been afraid of the massive torque ripping the axles apart? My experience has been that the Corvette rear end wouldn't stand up to the same stresses that a 12 bolt will. It could have been strictly a warranty issue. For instance, Pontiac wouldn't offer a solid lifter car for street use,i.e., with a warranty, if my memory serves me. This was because they didn't want the added liability .

[JoeC]

The only reason I can think of that they offered no higher then 3:36 ratio is because of potential TH400 trans oil temp. problems. There was some problems with overheating with the 68 Corvette big blocks and some changes were made in 1969 but engineering may have felt the increased trans RPM with a 4:11 ratio would have caused high temps. in the trans oil cooler thus in the radiator. While the Corvette slanted radiator was good for bouncing a radar signal, it may not have worked as well as the Camaro/Chevelle set-up that did use the TH400 with the 4:10 ratio. Just guessing here.

[bowtie3168]

I wanted to contribute to this conversation, I feel that this is a important topic. When I went to the reunion, Ray Morrison and I discussed "The Pure Stock Drags". Let me start out by saying that I think that the idea of the race is GREAT! There are not many opportunities such as this for everyone to get together and race like this. The people who put on the event should be commended for their effort.On the topic of "clone" cars, I feel that they do belong as long as they are true clone cars. What I mean is, the clones should have proper documentation and display proof of their existence. I think that "clone cars" can be good in the way that if you were to wreck a clone you would not be destoying a piece of valuable history. To the best of my knowledge no Chevrolet "factory" drag racer had a L89 Nova. Dick Harrell, Bill "Grumpy" Jenkins, Malcolm Durham, none of them raced a aluminum headed Nova. Don't you think that they would have raced them if they were produced by Chevrolet Motor Division? I know that the claim is that there were only a handful built and that NHRA and AHRA have minimum numbers that are required to meet to qualify (Chevrolet have to produce 50 L78 Turbo-Hydro cars to meet this requirement for example). I feel that you should be able to build a clone car if you can produce the real car or crediable paper work that everyone agrees with. As for the 1968-1969 L89 question, I have two friends who both own L89 optioned cars, one has a 1969 SS396 Camaro, and the other is (I believe) a 1968 Corvette that also happens to be a tri-power car. Both cars are original (if you can believe it)! So I think that the owners argument could be that 68-69 were both "aluminum head years". I feel that the person builds a clone car should have to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the car was made. Grey area should be addressed properly. There should be no question about a cars existance, if there is the car should not run. I would also like to say that this problem should not keep anyone from participating in the event! If you have a problem you owe it to everyone to correct it!

Thanks,
Andrew

[Rowdy Rat]

Joe,

That's the most reasonable theory I've heard to date on the gear ratio topic. I'm going to do a little research along that line of thinking and see what turns up.

sixtiesmuscle,

I'm not sure that I'd go along with the rear axle ratio restrictions being due entirely to the durability of the differential (I do agree that it wasn't nearly as strong as a 12 bolt). If anything, the automatic transmission would be a bit easier on parts than a manual transmission. Considering the Corvette's F70 x 15 tires and independent rear suspension, you'd have a tough time getting the car to launch hard enough to grenade the differential (although I wouldn't rule out a half shaft u-joint or two!).

Rob,

Can't wait to hear what Corvette plans you have for next year's event!

Regards,

Stan

[sYc]

Gentlemen; I am trying to understand some the previous posts. Anytime in the past when the mention of clones/fakes came up on this forum, the majority of people were against them, for many reasons. But now I am reading where it is OK to race one. Why is racing any different then the Supercar Reunion, Super Chevy Shows, the Camaro or Chevelle Nats, etc. How long before we see cloned Yenkos at the PSMC drags, as there are already cloned Gibb cars. What will the reaction be when MCR magazine or Speed Vision film a clone over a "real" car? It has happened at other events (ask Brian). It has been brought up about the value of the Supercars, I agree this is a concern. I think about it every time we race our Yenko Camaro. But, that is what so special about these cars. One of the best parts of the Supercar Reunion is watching these rare cars drive from the hotel to the trade center. I would rather see Brian drive his L-88 Yenko Camaro this short distance then see 50 clone L-89 Novas race. Who can forget the sound of a true Phase III Vette fire up, or the L-88 Motion Vette, Mark T. in his B-M Camaro, all of the Yenkos doing burnouts on the street. What about Greg's '67 Yenko getting sideways at the track this year, no way does a souped up L-78 Camaro compare with this. Ask anyone who was at the Gibb reunion what they remember most and it will be the rare supercars doing burnouts on the main drag of LaHarpe. Yes, I would hate to see one of these rare cars damaged, such as Ray's. But, if we do not take a few chances with our cars in public, then we are opening the door for the clones/fakes to replace us, and they will. People/media want to see them, either real or fake. It does not have to be "hard" passes, major burnouts, etc. A soft pass by Mark Hassett in his Zl-1 or Mike Riley in his Berger Camaro is way better then any "built" car running in the 12s. Is not that what these cars were built for in the beginning??? Sorry if I stepped on some toes, but that is how I feel. Bring on the REAL Supercars, not clones. Tom

[Kurt S]

Bowtie3168,
There is now a registry for the 69 L89 Camaros. I can dig out the contact info for the keepers of it. I'd also be interested in some info on the car and I could forward the data on. [email protected] CRG

Thanks.
Kurt

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Tom;
I'll go along with that!
M

[Charley Lillard]

Opinions ? Is a re-bodied car a Clone ? If a famous Musclecar shows up at your event and you know it is a Re-body do you let it in ? When a Yenko shows up that used to be a Firebird do you let it in ? Is ZL1 # 27 a ZL1 that has been re-bodied or is it a Clone. Would you let it in ? At what point are they Clones ?

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Personally, I think there is a big difference between a rebody and a clone. The rebody has the VIN and TRIM TAG plates that correspond with a real car, a clone is a copy of a car type. Anybody can clone a car, only the owner of the real car can perform a rebody.

There are some cars that are so far gone that people rebody them in order to save them. Everybody has a different definition of 'too far gone', but nonetheless it does save a valuable musclecar. I would define 'too far gone' for a sub-frame car when the structural integrity is lost due to rust damage only. I believe a tubbed car can be rebuilt, and under no circumstances do you restamp the firewall. Of course using a Firebird body to rebody a Camaro is sinful!

Unfortunately, some people think a rebody is the first alternative when restoring a car, when it should be the last. Just because you have this 'nice' or 'rustfree' car around, or can 'get' one doesn't mean that a rebody is the answer. If a car is too rough for you to handle, then let someone else restore it before you rebody a restorable car.

I would let a rebody race at the PS-Drags, but would lean against the clones.

Just a thought,
Marlin

[sixtiesmuscle]

Marlin, WELL SAID!

[sYc]

I agree with Marlin, there is a big difference between a clone and a rebody. To me, clones are no different then any other "regular" production car, OK, but not what I enjoy seeeing. On the other hand, a rebodied car has some connection to a real supercar, even if just the VIN (documented) and trim tags. With rebodied cars, the number of cars possible will not change, 69 ZL-1 Camaros, 198 1969 Yenko Camaros, 99 Yenko Chevelles, etc. With clones, there could be 1000s, such as the Cobra. As per the rebody versus replace sheetmetal issue, that is a choice the owner will have to make. I do agree that the more original sheetmetal/parts that can be used the better. To me, an all original sheetmetal/parts car is the ultimate prize. Why do you think Brian pursued his current dream car for over 20 years. And yes, a rebodied car can attend the reunion. If not, where do we draw the line, 100%, 80%, or 50% original parts. I would hate to be the one who has to determine "how real" a car is. From what I have heard, many of the restored supercars have at least some non-original sheetmetal/parts. And, to bring up another related topic, why is a rebodied car frowned upon, but it is OK to replace everything else, driveline, interior, trim etc? Original is original, whether talking sheetmetal or dash pad. Tom

[Charley Lillard]

I like this discussion. More opinions please. My understanding of ZL1 # 27 is the car was bought years ago but the buyers said just send the Title and Tags. So the Tags were put on another car. Is the new car a ZL1 ? If the old car still exists with the vin # stampings on the body is it a ZL1 ? If they both showed up at a meet which one is the real car ? Are they both ?

[mnyenko]

What are the vin and cowl tags worth for a Yenko chevelle with a clear title but no car?The car was crushed do to rust around 1980.Would this car be a clone if built and tags switched?

[restorer]

I dont see how you could sit in a car with just a trim tag and VIN plate and get any feeling of it being a legitimate Super Car. If even a small piece is saved at least there would be some kindred spirit attached to it.

[micky69396]

I am going to throw this out for something to think about. Lets say you have this basket case Yenko, COPO, whatever your restoring. The body is wasted. Your replacing all the ft. end metal, Fenders, inners, rad. support, etc. The doors are junk usually. The quarters are junk, the floor pans, trunk pans, deck lid. You know the drill. Most of the time the chassis is saved. How much original metal is really on that restored legit car, not much. I am the last person that will even think about it,(rebodying) but sometimes there is not a good reason to fix junk. There is a issue of dollars spent to justify the end result. I do not condone it, but sometimes its the only thing to do. Would making it a parts car and eventually crushing it be any better. I dont think so.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Micky;
I agree with you that for those owners who will not, or can not do their own restoration work will need to send it to a professional and will need to follow the 'cost/benefit' rule. I know that Brian has had to pass on an original drivetrain, 25k mile Yenko Nova because the rust was so severe that the his customer couldn't justify purchasing it.

In a case like this, I feel that the restoration shop should pass on the car - but not part it out or rebody it. A car like this should be a long-term project for an individual who will put in his own long hours for free, and restore the car for his own pleasure - regardless of how many hours or dollars he ends up spending. Many of us who do our own restorations will end up with a cost equal to or exceeding the current market value. This is usually due to the big dollars needed to secure the correct sheetmetal and parts, but we will make up for it by enjoying the car and not being afraid to damage something that we've already learned how to fix!!

I don't think I could ever 'part-out' a Yenko. It's a matter of putting the right cars into the hands of the right owners, and getting the restorations done right.

M

[JoeC]

mnyenko, Do you have any other info on the crushed Yenko Chevelle? What paint and interior code number is on the tag?

[micky69396]

Peter, all I will add to this is, it can be done right and there are ways that cars can be repaired so that no one would know right down to the smallest detail. I do not think its right, but in some cases there will be exceptions.

That being said, my Biscaynes floors are damaged from driveshaft "failures" and the rear end cover is dinged from bad gears, would I think of fixing them, no. It adds to the history.

[Peter]

Micky, your forgetting some details that happen when you rebody a car. Take for example a 69 Yenko. Its trashed so you find a 69 6cyl car that is absolutely beautiful and really cheap. Perfect for a rebody. But there are certain details about the 6 cyl coupe that are different than the Yenko. Something as simple as the dual exhaust hanger welded on the drivers side frame rail. Thats 6 cyl car body isn't going to have that and its going to have to be welded on. Now it may not look original when done. So a expert may look at the car and say, "what, this car is a fake, it isn't even a factory dual exhaust car as it was modified". Thats just one little thing but a rebody takes away originality and history. My brother in law has a 69 RS/Z that has floor damage from being drag raced and parts breaking. He could put in new floors but you lose that peice of history. Of course if it was a show car you wouldn't keep the floor damaged anyway. Say the rest of the car was shot so he decides to rebody with a rust free shell. Next owner buys the car and does a check on past owners and ends up getting a hold of the original owner that says he raced the car hard and told the guy about the damaged floors and such. Owner looks under the car and the floors are perfect and original. Hmmm whats up with that, now he thinks something is fishy. The car isn't what it used to be anymore when you rebody.
Marlin, your last post was excellent. For people that pay someone else to do work I can see where the rebody would be a choice, not for me though. I know af alot of good cars that were parted because the owner got some outrageous price from a body shop to do work and so on while it wouldn't have been that bad for someone that could do the work themselves providing they had the time and ambition. The rusty Yenko Nova is a perfect example just like you mentioned. I live in MA so I have seen plenty of rusty cars and could just imagine bringing a car like that to a body man and saying how much. But if you have seen what I have gone through on cars that aren't even rare then that Yenko sounds like a great deal for the right buyer without having to part it or rebody it. I guess I am just repeating what you said but it was very well put and although I don't have a Yenko or ZL1 I have learned a great deal from this site and it was one of the few conversations I feel I could reply to without owning one of these great cars. Hopefully one day my not rare, bought pretty much as a shell, maybe a SS 396 Camaro, will someday be painted and look good. Without taking up any more time all I can say is keep the interaction coming, I'm learing alot just hanging out on the sidelines!!

[Peter]

OK I agree with enough money and time you could rebody without anyone knowing. It would really have to be a high dollar car to go to such lengths and I still don't agree but I see what your saying. Glad your leaving your Biscayne as is. I think the history and character is more important than having a perfect floorboard for show. Everyone goes crazy over a cars history so why not leave a little of it there!

[Chevy454]

I'm not sure how "interested" you guys might be in this, but I found this while checking up on the "competetion": http://buickgsca.com/ubb/Forum23/HTML/000056.html

This is a thread on the Buick GS Club of America ( http://buickgsca.com/ ). I found it while trying to find a couple of the Buick owners that I saw in Michigan, and this thread covers how some of them feel about the Pure Stock Drags. They seem to feel that the Buick's are just naturally faster than the other makes, and that they diserve more credit...any thoughts?

[Steven J]

Members of the Buick Gran Sport Club of America have been very active in the development of the "stock appearing" GS. Although they apparently detuned their cars somewhat for the Pure Stock race, most of the other modifications are not going to be visible without an engine tear down. I'm surprised that more of the Chevrolet crowd hasn't gotten into the stock appearing modifications. The Buick guys have done a lot of testing/development toward these goals.

Although the goal of the PSMCDR is to feature highly tuned pure stock vehicles, unfortunately, the trend seems to be going towards who has the fastest car. Other than getting involved in an overly complicated tech inspection, probably not much can be done.

One possibility, as previously mentioned, would be to have a pure stock class and a stock appearing class. Or, separate two classes by ET, one for the 12 sec cars, and another for the 13.00 and above.