Posted By: Mr.Yuck
F.A.S.T. question - 03/01/12 10:00 PM
not sure where this goes or wwhy I even thought of it buttttt, since you could get a Hemi 4 door Coronet or belvedere would that make a "clone" leagle for FAST?
F.A.S.T. question
Posted By: 383man
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/01/12 11:06 PM
I would say yes. Why you got one ? 
Ron
Ron
Posted By: Mr.Yuck
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/01/12 11:16 PM
Quote:
I would say yes. Why you got one ?
no but it would be way cheaper to find a nice solid 4 door than a 2 door. The cost offset one could build a Hemi and have a nice sleeper right? I mean the only upgrade from the DeLuxe trim would be two 29.99 emblems, and the Hemi of course.
Posted By: domingo
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/01/12 11:48 PM
HEAVY
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 12:40 AM
100% legal...
And the combination would be very cool. I often thought of going this route as I have a primo 66 Coronet 4 door that I used for parts for my 66 Hemi 500. Now, not sure what to do with the body, I thought of building it up for FAST. The weight wouldnt be the problem, as the 4 door cars are about the same size and weight as the 2 door cars in these models. I believe the wheelbase is the same.
This particular car probably wouldn't be the best choice if you really wanted to build a "max effort" entry because the aerodynamics suck and more importantly it has no fresh air hood and the 14" narrow tire is a negative as well. But the rear overhang is good and the Hemi is such a good package for FAST(in fact it's probably the most lethal-maybe the L88 Vette is better??).
So even if it wasn't the best choice of car, with a sorted out FAST hemi, you would be able to very competitive with it!
MB
And the combination would be very cool. I often thought of going this route as I have a primo 66 Coronet 4 door that I used for parts for my 66 Hemi 500. Now, not sure what to do with the body, I thought of building it up for FAST. The weight wouldnt be the problem, as the 4 door cars are about the same size and weight as the 2 door cars in these models. I believe the wheelbase is the same.
This particular car probably wouldn't be the best choice if you really wanted to build a "max effort" entry because the aerodynamics suck and more importantly it has no fresh air hood and the 14" narrow tire is a negative as well. But the rear overhang is good and the Hemi is such a good package for FAST(in fact it's probably the most lethal-maybe the L88 Vette is better??).
So even if it wasn't the best choice of car, with a sorted out FAST hemi, you would be able to very competitive with it!
MB
Posted By: Mr.Yuck
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 01:03 AM
Quote:
HEAVY
not really.
Like Mike said the draw backs would be tire and no fresh air. You can take lots of weight off the car. And it would be very cool to see a 4 door dodge run against a aluminum blcok vette and hold it's own. I bet you could get a base line 4 door lighter than a 69-70 2 door b-body
Posted By: JohnRR
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 01:07 AM
Quote:Quote:
HEAVY
not really.
Like Mike said the draw backs would be tire and no fresh air. You can take lots of weight off the car. And it would be very cool to see a 4 door dodge run against a aluminum headed vette and hold it's own. I bet you could get a base line 4 door lighter than a 69-70 2 door b-body
fixed
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 01:15 AM
Quote:Quote:
HEAVY
not really.
Like Mike said the draw backs would be tire and no fresh air. You can take lots of weight off the car. And it would be very cool to see a 4 door dodge run against a aluminum blcok vette and hold it's own. I bet you could get a base line 4 door lighter than a 69-70 2 door b-body
The tire would be a drawback, but one thing the Hemi has is its a package that makes horsepower up top and not necessarily a torque monster-which is the MAIN reason its so deadly for FAST. That being said, Ed Cook managed to put down a 1.52 60' on G70-14's and NO TRACTION device, with the 3800 lb '63 MW Plymouth. And that motor made 778 lb/ft of torque! It can be done.
MB
Posted By: pacifica
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 02:18 AM
That being said, Ed Cook managed to put down a 1.52 60' on G70-14's and NO TRACTION device, with the 3800 lb '63 MW Plymouth. And that motor made 778 lb/ft of torque! It can be done.
MB
So what is done or can be done to said car to get it to 60 ft like that?
MB
So what is done or can be done to said car to get it to 60 ft like that?
Posted By: Mr.Yuck
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 02:21 AM
Those cars dodn't have a 15" option?????
Posted By: hemi-itis
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 02:41 AM
Quote:
That being said, Ed Cook managed to put down a 1.52 60' on G70-14's and NO TRACTION device, with the 3800 lb '63 MW Plymouth. And that motor made 778 lb/ft of torque! It can be done.
MB
So what is done or can be done to said car to get it to 60 ft like that?
Alot of blood,,,,,sweat,,,,,,,and TEARS!!!
I have had the honor of hangin with theses guys and have to say what a CLASS operation the Cook family is
The guys that run F.A.S.T. & SUPERCARS are a pleasure to hang with and they ALWAYS put on a great show.If you never watched them,make an effort this year.You'll be glad you did and won't believe thay do what they do on that tiny tini tire
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 03:56 AM
Quote:
That being said, Ed Cook managed to put down a 1.52 60' on G70-14's and NO TRACTION device, with the 3800 lb '63 MW Plymouth. And that motor made 778 lb/ft of torque! It can be done.
MB
So what is done or can be done to said car to get it to 60 ft like that?
Frankly, not a whole lot..
There are some that are using timing delays to pull some power out so that they dont hit the tires too hard, but I know for a fact that Ed(and most of the others) don't use it. You can't miss the ones that do. they are the ones popping and farting at the tree.
It all comes down to driving skills and practice.
MB
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 03:58 AM
Quote:
Those cars dodn't have a 15" option?????
Nope.
Posted By: HotRodDave
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 04:53 AM
0% legal though as the rules clearly say no 4 doors.
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 05:17 AM
Quote:
0% legal though as the rules clearly say no 4 doors.
Sorry Dave, you are incorrect...
This was brought up years ago and its 100% legal. I dont know what rules you are reading, but there is nothing in the FAST rules that excludes 4 door vehicles. Please cut and paste the "rule" that you refer to.
MB
Posted By: Mr.Yuck
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 02:52 PM
Quote:
0% legal though as the rules clearly say no 4 doors.
LAME wonder why? I guess no wagons either then.
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 03:37 PM
Quote:Quote:
0% legal though as the rules clearly say no 4 doors.
LAME wonder why? I guess no wagons either then.
I dont know where he got that info from. Its been discussed. Its 100% legal and nothing in the rules states otherwise.
Build it!
MB
Posted By: domingo
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 03:46 PM
2 extra doors, windows, mechanisms, latches, B pillar seem kinda heavy to me? maybe im wrong....
Posted By: B_Body_Bob
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 03:51 PM
Quote:
2 extra doors, windows, mechanisms, latches, B pillar seem kinda heavy to me? maybe im wrong....
Is operational windows a tech item?
Posted By: Mr.Yuck
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 04:02 PM
Quote:Quote:
2 extra doors, windows, mechanisms, latches, B pillar seem kinda heavy to me? maybe im wrong....
Is operational windows a tech item?
While I'm still having fun w/ the Charger I was just thinking about the next thing. Anyway I'd remove all the hardware so the window would just be hung in the door...no door guts... The heater/ac box would be empty, the wiper motor would be a shell, behind the door panels there'd be lots of holes, as well as under the dash pad, kick panels...you kinda see what I'm saying? Cutting up a nice clean 2 door would be a sin but an old ugly 4 door... get the
out. I'd bet you could get it down under 3200lbs.
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 04:20 PM
Quote:
2 extra doors, windows, mechanisms, latches, B pillar seem kinda heavy to me? maybe im wrong....
Domingo...
Most of the factory literature I have list a 4 door at about 35 lb heavier than a comparably equipped 2 door..Wheelbase is the same. Remember, a two door still has quarter window glass, regulators, ets. If you got creative, you can lose that weight easily. Like stated earlier, if the goal was a "max effort" type of deal, then start with something else. But I dont think the weight issue is anything here.
MB
Posted By: Mr.Yuck
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 04:35 PM
1966 Belvedere I Series BR1/2-L RL41 4 dr Sedan - 6P $2,315/$2,409 Shipping weight - 3,040/3,210 lbs
1969 Dode Super Bee WM21 Not Available 2 dr Coupe - 6P - $3,076 - Shipping weight - 3,440 lbs
1969 Dode Super Bee WM21 Not Available 2 dr Coupe - 6P - $3,076 - Shipping weight - 3,440 lbs
Posted By: domingo
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 05:42 PM
Well if they dont need to be operational then there wouldnt be much that of a difference.
Posted By: HotRodDave
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 05:45 PM
Been a couple years since I was considering it (4 door 273 4bbl dart) looks like they updated a bunch of rules in 2010.
It does say all windows must be functional and up during a run. Rule 1.10
It does say all windows must be functional and up during a run. Rule 1.10
Posted By: B_Body_Bob
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 06:32 PM
Quote:
you kinda see what I'm saying? Cutting up a nice clean 2 door would be a sin but an old ugly 4 door
Yeah I'm with you. I've got a nice clean 2 door that was cut up that way. There's a lot of unnecessary metal that's covered up when the car is assembled.
Posted By: 5126brl No more
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/02/12 07:31 PM
What is UP HPMike?
Hope all is well.
As far as getting Ed's car to 1.52 60 ft???
I do remember seeing some redlines that were pretty soft
Hope all is well.
As far as getting Ed's car to 1.52 60 ft???
I do remember seeing some redlines that were pretty soft
Posted By: Dave Watt
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/03/12 02:38 AM
I checked the FAST and Pure Stock Drag rules. Neither one of them say that 4-doors or wagons are not legal. It just says "1955-74 muscle cars".
Posted By: domingo
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/03/12 05:25 PM
Quote:
I checked the FAST and Pure Stock Drag rules. Neither one of them say that 4-doors or wagons are not legal. It just says "1955-74 muscle cars".
if it says that then how come vettes are allowed? I know this has been beaten to death, but now reading MUSCLECARS (I have never read the rules before), I would say there is NO ROOM FOR ALLOWING A VETTE IN THERE!
Posted By: JohnRR
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/03/12 06:44 PM
Quote:Quote:
I checked the FAST and Pure Stock Drag rules. Neither one of them say that 4-doors or wagons are not legal. It just says "1955-74 muscle cars".
if it says that then how come vettes are allowed? I know this has been beaten to death, but now reading MUSCLECARS (I have never read the rules before), I would say there is NO ROOM FOR ALLOWING A VETTE IN THERE!
Posted By: Mr.Yuck
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/03/12 10:38 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1966-Dodg...=item4ab4a31501
do you have to paint them up all nice or can they look like this?
+y,BPTUBjQwd!~~60_3.jpg "7101703-$(KGrHqFHJEQE88dE)+y,BPTUBjQwd!~~60_3.jpg")
do you have to paint them up all nice or can they look like this?
Posted By: cdp
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/06/12 11:07 PM
I was wondering the same thing...there is a SUPER CLEAN, which really can't even describe it, whitish-tan 1966 /6 w/auto, rubber floor mat, and radio delete within a few blocks from me. Price was kind of high, but the car is mint, inside and out, including the trunk and mat. 99% original.
Car has 43k original miles and has always been garaged until last year.
Car has 43k original miles and has always been garaged until last year.
Posted By: XXHEMI
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/08/12 01:13 PM
Mr Yuck
The class was suppose to be show cars that run FAST. With that in mind the cars should be presentable. But I don't think they need to be perfect. I would love to see a survivior type car running?
Mike,
1.57 sixty was the best so far but since you posted the 52 I will try to make it happen. Going testing down at MIR on the 30th. As you know I did not do anything to the car over the winter but will be testing tire sizes. After that I will get together with you on some gear changes???
Thanks Ed
The class was suppose to be show cars that run FAST. With that in mind the cars should be presentable. But I don't think they need to be perfect. I would love to see a survivior type car running?
Mike,
1.57 sixty was the best so far but since you posted the 52 I will try to make it happen. Going testing down at MIR on the 30th. As you know I did not do anything to the car over the winter but will be testing tire sizes. After that I will get together with you on some gear changes???
Thanks Ed
Posted By: 383man
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/08/12 02:14 PM
Quote:
Mr Yuck
The class was suppose to be show cars that run FAST. With that in mind the cars should be presentable. But I don't think they need to be perfect. I would love to see a survivior type car running?
Mike,
1.57 sixty was the best so far but since you posted the 52 I will try to make it happen. Going testing down at MIR on the 30th. As you know I did not do anything to the car over the winter but will be testing tire sizes. After that I will get together with you on some gear changes???
Thanks Ed
Good luck Ed. Hey Ed will you be racing at Cecil at all this year ? Ron
Posted By: HPMike
Re: F.A.S.T. question - 03/08/12 04:27 PM
I had 1.52 in my head for some reason...whoops.. Still, the 1.57 is killer..
MB
MB