|
Re: Randy humphrey Pro Stock duster
[Re: ProSport]
#151379
01/04/09 03:56 PM
01/04/09 03:56 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 268
South Central Pa
webemopes
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 268
South Central Pa
|
Quote:
I think he was trying to do a 'stoppie'. You know, nail the front brakes and dangle the rear in the air.
That's funny right there, I don't care who you are.
Good one ProSport 
|
|
|
Re: Randy humphrey Pro Stock duster
[Re: cudadoug]
#151380
01/05/09 09:21 AM
01/05/09 09:21 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,155
Tucson, Arizona
clonestocker
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,155
Tucson, Arizona
|
CudaDoug,
You saved my picture. That car was for sale at a swap meet at Daytona. There was also a 1970 Challenger with a hemi in m it that was a rag. The Duster was for sale for $6500.00 that day. I looked long and hard at that car but how was I going to get it home, etc. It was a beautiful car. matt
[img] [/img]
|
|
|
Re: Randy humphrey Pro Stock duster
[Re: clonestocker]
#151382
01/05/09 01:30 PM
01/05/09 01:30 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
CudaDoug,
You saved my picture. That car was for sale at a swap meet at Daytona. There was also a 1970 Challenger with a hemi in m it that was a rag. The Duster was for sale for $6500.00 that day. I looked long and hard at that car but how was I going to get it home, etc. It was a beautiful car. matt
$6,500?? I would give that much in a heartbeat..If I remember right it had a magnesium dana60...That alone is probably worth $3,500 
|
|
|
Re: Randy humphrey Pro Stock duster
[Re: dc426]
#151384
01/05/09 01:44 PM
01/05/09 01:44 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,155
Tucson, Arizona
clonestocker
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,155
Tucson, Arizona
|
DC,
I think this picture has the name Rodney Barr on the door. Ring any bells? matt
[img] [/img]
|
|
|
Re: Randy humphrey Pro Stock duster
#151385
01/05/09 02:30 PM
01/05/09 02:30 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
Monte_Smith
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
|
Quote:
Quote:
not sure if anyone cares but for the archives. I found this on the web of Randy's car.
DC
It's amazing how high the back end is. Why did they do that? Had backhalfing not been invented yet?
He may be on the brakes there, but I doubt it, the front end is not dipped. It is standing up on the tire and the rear suspension is topped out. Just shows you how little downforce the early cars had and why they were unstable at speed. The cars did not sit that high at rest. This is a perfect picture to show the lack of aero at work. With no wing, the air rushing over and under the car is trying to lift the rear off the ground. Good picture.
Monte
|
|
|
Re: Randy humphrey Pro Stock duster
[Re: Monte_Smith]
#151389
01/06/09 08:06 PM
01/06/09 08:06 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 39
SLC, Utah
mgpanos
member
|
member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 39
SLC, Utah
|
Quote:
Even the smallest amount of downforce will put a flat spot on a tire at speed. These two pics definitely show that these cars had no downforce. The high in the rear, low in the front attitude at rest contributes to the problem, because we see similar cars today that go faster with no wing and have no issues. Also todays cars, tires and tracks are better.
Monte
You also have to remember that the rules in those days almost dictated this stance because the tire could be no further than 3" inboard of the outer wheelwell, This limited how far inboard the wheel/tire combo could be placed, and the curvature of the body limited how low the body could sit without rubbing the sidewalls. Today's PS cars have a huge gap between the outside edge of the wheelwell and the side of the tire, and tubs that seem to go to the roof.
I have also attached a photo of a Monza and a Colt at close to the end of the 1/4 mile from the mid/late 70's, and you can see how much the tires were growing in circumference. The PS guys depended on this growth so they could run a low rearend gear, usually 5.57 or 5.86, with some of the high-winding guys even running 6.0 or 6.17. Yikes! With the small motors back then in PS, you had to depend on low gear ratios and high rpm to get the car moving, and then tire growth so it didn't blow its crank all over the finish line from too much rpm.
Just my $0.02,
Mark
|
|
|
Re: Randy humphrey Pro Stock duster
[Re: hghumphrey]
#151392
09/15/09 02:24 PM
09/15/09 02:24 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,504
DFW
mr_340
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,504
DFW
|
I sort of remember an article in Hot Rod or Camaro Craft talking about a four degree nose down attitude was optimum for minimizing aerodynamic drag.
Floyd Lippencott IV
|
|
|
|
|
