HPZ95MARO

Brian
Opinion??? If you have T-tops and a full roll cage , if you X the Halo you think that would do away with having to run a wrap around driver cage like your camaro to run 9.99 and lower????

Ackattack1

iTrader: (7)

If you look at the f-body structually, the hard top's roof strength comes from the middle bar just as a t-top car's does. Essentially a hardtop just has some sheet metal over wear the t-top would go. Granted it is a little stronger with a structual piece on the side, but most of it's strength comes from the middle support.

That is one of the reason's you will rarely ever see a hard top with a sun roof (there are a few people stupid enough to cut into it)

I think this is a bunch of crap!

McRat

Of all the dumb *** chicken **** rules.

I hope that ain't true.

They have been making T-Top cars for God Damn 3 decades!!!! And NOW, suddenly they are dangerous????? OMG!!! DANGER!!! DANGER!!!!

Here is the dirty truth:
The NHRA doesn't want your late-model car at the track. Expect more and more dumb rules added to the book to try and keep you away from the track.

At our NHRA Street Legal Drag website, they had a comment on there that late model F-bodies are the most dangerous cars at the track. The site is no longer there, I should have saved it.

I challenge ANYONE from the NHRA to PROVE the T-Top Fbody is more dangerous than a 68 Dodge Charger stock for stock at the same speed. Even rollover.

The NHRA hates late model cars. They barely even acknowledge their existence. Hopefully, all those old farts will die off from boredom and get some fresh blood in their senile organization.

NHRA Blows.

dvandentop

iTrader: (1)

that is dumb as hell

McRat

13.99

Think about it.

The NHRA is saying that going 100 mph in a straight line for a brief instant is unreasonably hazardous in a car with:

Unibody construction
Auto-fuel shutoff
Airbags
3-pt seat belts
Padded interior
Roof bracing (see an Fbody with the paint off)
Side impact bars
Huge ABS power brake
Z-rated steel-belted tires
Crumple zones
Traction Control
Driveshaft retainer
Aluminum driveshaft
etc, etc, etc

Is more dangerous than a:

4-wheel non-assist drum brakes
Lap belt
Body-on-frame (until impact that is)
Unpadded interior
Not checked for rollover safety
Not checked for impact safety
Exposed metal fuel tank with carburator that spills on impact.
Super flamable interior materials
Filthy handling
etc, etc.

One is safe (according to the Ninnies Have Real Attitudes), and one is not.

They must have done some gawdamn intensive research. Maybe they should have actually looked at the Fbody first though...

2QuickZ's

Well, I'm not affected by the rule change either way since my 2002 is a hard top and my convertible has an 8 point roll bar, but...

WHAT A STUPID *** RULE!

Maybe the NHRA doesn't realize a FACTORY T top roofed car has to have the same minimum strength that a hard top car does? If they are concerned that peoples heads or arms are going to come out the top, maybe they don't know that side window glass can/will break in a rollover? What a bunch of dumb F*cks!

BizZzatch350

iTrader: (33)

That is by far the stupidest thing I have ever heard, It is a direct attempt to get F-bodies out. If they do this, the following cars need roll bars as well:

Any thing targo
Any thing with a sun/moon roof

McRat

Hey! Here's a catchy title for a newpaper article:

NHRA moves to encourage street-racing

In order to make more track time available to trailer queens, many whom are homeless, the NHRA has wisely decided to ban nearly 500,000 GM performance cars from racing at their tracks.

"The street is the best place to race your new cars! Besides, you don't leak oil and it makes us look bad!", said Arny Ahole spokesman for the NHRA Street Legal Drag Program who currently campaigns a 1932 Ford.
Rumor has it that Arny was bitten by a Camaro as a child and has never gotten over it.

Smallwood

If this is true, then I guess my retirement from street racing will end.

1999Daytona500PaceCar

iTrader: (2)

The comments regarding street racing are right on the money... Cities like Houston that thought they had a problem with street racing "ain't seen nothin' yet"!

Probably just boils down to some more political crap...

devilyellow

would that also mean you have to have a helmet pretty much no matter what?

-j
www.ls1gto.com

McRat

I have no problems with helmets. If you race, you should wear one. Even when I drive someone's car that runs slow, I still wear one.

I do have a problem with arbitrary rules put into place to just target late model cars.

This will affect not only Camaros and Firebirds, but Corvettes as well. Funny thing is, when you look at how they are constructed, the Corvette Coupe is no more dangerous than the FRC.

SmokinZed

Geez, this new rule stinks.

Well I have a wolfe 4 point powdercoated bolt in roll bar for sale that I no longer need, if anyone would like it PM me and let me know. You will have to weld the crossbar though since it is removable. Shipping will have to be via freight too...

66ImpalaLT1

This whole situation is BS.

The NHRA doesnt care about the little guy.

The simple fact that they charge for the rule book and dont give it away on their website tells me that they care more about money than safety.

Eric

wicked 98z

This is BS. I wish my c5 was fast since its a hard top. But the camaro is the fast one and it has T tops I just wish RCR was closer.

ALbert

Joe Overton

Guess in order to race and since its open cockpit...bringon arm restraints...looks like i ibetter buy a more aerodynamic helmet.

kp

iTrader: (34)

It was just a matter of time before it happened. NHRA is dictated by its insurance and late f-bodies sure arent any insurance companies favorite.. I had the tech guy at IRP tell me two years ago that they were going to put t-top cars in the same class as convertables. I just cant see how they compare the two, yes there is nothing on the sides where the t-top latches but the factory cages in these cars are pretty strong, I cant see how a 5 point roll bar will help anything the NHRA is concerned about.

If it happens it happens, easy enough to avoid NHRA tracks around here - especially bristol which is one of the slowest tracks on earth :/

Targa C5s are even worse then f-bodies since they have no support between the windshield and halo like the f-bodies so I'm curious to see what happens with them.

Doesnt matter much anyhow, the NHRA would much rather have rice (excuse me, 'sport compact' since thats where the money is now) nights. 20.00 a car and no one will get hurt in a 20 second Honda

Colonel

That is about some silly azz retarded logic that the NHRA used on that one.

McRat makes a very good case. Late model cars are ALOT safer than the old stuff. I know, I used to run the old stuff, as did alot of you. I feel a helluvalot safer at 137 MPH in my F-bod than I did at 110 MPH in my '67 Chevy II. Heck, I'd feel safer at 175 MPH than I did in that old thing at 110 MPH...seriously.

Camaroholic

iTrader: (1)

Us tin foil hat types smell conspiracy under every rock, and this smells no different. Since late model F-bodies are the only cars I can think of with T-tops, sounds pretty exclusive to me. Or maybe some of the early 90's 300ZX's (didn't they have T's?). But that's it. So, this will kill any chance of a "F-body racing league", IMO.

I too bought a stripper hardtop just to race, so it doesn't affect me either, but I know the structural integrity difference between the two is extremely minimal.

Why don't they outlaw glass on cars too, since people can get cut if it shatters. For that matter, I've cut myself on the edges of the motor where it's sharp. Why don't they require filed and smoothed engines? Or why don't they just go ahead and require fast filling foam (a la Demolition Man)?

Someone was out to get F-bodies. That's obvious.

-Andrew

jfm

iTrader: (4)

IHRA seem to be the most progressive,you dont need a bar until you run quicker than 11.50 unless they are changing too.