[Alvin]

CNBC stats? Ha Ha Ha!!! Why not just jump in whole hog with Brian Williams, the (NBC run) Weather Channel and MSNBC stats on “The Game”. Outcome will most certainly have the same bias on all subjects THEY comment on.

IMO: Totally non-credible reporting by anyone/thing affiliated w NBC. According to them: “Hurricane Katrina was man made”. Need I say more? No.

[MikeNoun]

Soooo....CNBC, Super Sunday Ad Tracker, and the Neilsen Ratings are all in the tank for Chevrolet. They must hate Ford, so they made up these numbers.

Hmmm.....THAT makes sense.

I agree with you about CNBC, MSNBC, and NBC history, I wouldn't trust them with the news, but there's no logical reason they would fudge numbers about Super Bowl commercials. The reason the stats were from CNBC was because the Super Bowl was on NBC.

[Tom Vaught]

HO HUM, Glad we saved our money on the deal.

Tom Vaught

I will e-mail the boss man of SVT on Monday and suggest that they find a better paint background for the SHELBY Letters (while keeping the traditional paint scheme).

[Greg Reid]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

Soooo....CNBC, Super Sunday Ad Tracker, and the Neilsen Ratings are all in the tank for Chevrolet. They must hate Ford, so they made up these numbers.

Hmmm.....THAT makes sense.

I agree with you about CNBC, MSNBC, and NBC history, I wouldn't trust them with the news, but there's no logical reason they would fudge numbers about Super Bowl commercials. The reason the stats were from CNBC was because the Super Bowl was on NBC.

I don't think they hate Ford but I do think that they love them some GM. I'll bet just about anything that if a certain President had run an ad during SB...Chevy would have been second and that President would have been first in their 'ratings'.
Maybe I'm just paranoid though...seriously...I am a little.

[Greg Reid]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

HO HUM, Glad we saved our money on the deal.

Tom Vaught

I will e-mail the boss man of SVT on Monday and suggest that they find a better paint background for the SHELBY Letters (while keeping the traditional paint scheme).

Maybe just a horizontal break in the stripe right where the script runs.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

Soooo....CNBC, Super Sunday Ad Tracker, and the Neilsen Ratings are all in the tank for Chevrolet. They must hate Ford, so they made up these numbers.

Hmmm.....THAT makes sense.

Figured that would get you going Mikey!

Could you please explain JEGS dump of Chebby for MOPAR?
Only thing that'd made it worse would have been if they'd switched to FORD! LOL!

[MikeNoun]

Alvin, it didn't "get me going", just pointing out the obvious.

As I mentioned before, I don't dislike Ford. In fact, I like the Mustang, always have.

I understand the animosity towards GM for the bailout. But sometimes the dislike for a certain political party, and a certain President, clouds some people's judgement. Next thing you know, they're rewriting automotive history.

Can't explain Jeg's going from Chevrolet to Mopar. Funding? There are hundreds of examples over the decades, in NASCAR, NHRA, and a many other motorsports, where a team switched from Mopar to Chevrolet, or from Ford to Pontiac, or from Chevrolet to Oldsmobile, etc.

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

OK Champ let's look into who REALLY built this engine :

What exactly on these Championship engines are built by Chevrolet ?

If you know anything about dirt track racing, you should know the answer...

The correct answer is - it depends on the class.

In the case of the track championship car that I worked on, the rules require an original manufacturers casting for the block, heads, intake and crank.

The block came our of an old Chevy van, the heads are Chevy 487X's, the 2 bbl (yes, rules require a 2bbl carb) cast iron intake came off my wife's '72 Camaro and the crank was the original one from the Chevy van.

So now that I've educated you again, can we please get back to recognizing the "longest lasting most dependable" trucks that are produced by Chevrolet.

Or are the Ford boys going to whine some more...

[MikeNoun]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

I will e-mail the boss man of SVT on Monday and suggest that they find a better paint background for the SHELBY Letters (while keeping the traditional paint scheme).

Tom, I think all they need to do is move the S-H-E-L-B-Y lettering inside the stripes, making the space between them smaller. The letters are individual, so all it would take would a change to where the holes are punched.

[Sidponcho]

I'd like to see "real" numbers comparing how many Ford pickup owners have gone to Chevy and vice-versa. Over say the last 30 years. That data would tell you something.

Ford is doing well with the eco boost......I'm glad. We want pickups and station wagons (SUV's) AND we want good fuel economy. Good for Ford on the eco boost.

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by The Champ

If you know anything about dirt track racing, you should know the answer...

The correct answer is - it depends on the class.

In the case of the track championship car that I worked on, the rules require an original manufacturers casting for the block, heads, intake and crank.

The block came our of an old Chevy van, the heads are Chevy 487X's, the 2 bbl (yes, rules require a 2bbl carb) cast iron intake came off my wife's '72 Camaro and the crank was the original one from the Chevy van.

So now that I've educated you again, can we please get back to recognizing the "longest lasting most dependable" trucks that are produced by Chevrolet.

Or are the Ford boys going to whine some more...

You have not educated me on anything. You're not even an engine builder. You're a rootin', tootin' fanboy. You're a typical Chebby guy.

I don't know much about dirt track racin' (usally it's all white trash at those events) but being an expert you know Classes vary from area to area. Even I know that. Do you really think the rules from track to track are not biased to a few buddies who might drive a certain make ? You mean to tell me the "Good 'ole Boys" at one track might not lean more towards one of their own regardless of what make the car is ? Some rules are waaay different in other states. That's a fact. One track in changed the rules one year that from minimum 112" wheelbase to 116". That kept the big 114 " Crown Vics. Couldn't be a COINCIDENCE that the big GM's were 116.1 could it ?
So, how the hell would I know about the rules up north since I never go there ?
And it was your friend who did the work to make it run like it did. A 145 hp wheezer done by GM couldnt beat a 2011 model minivan.
Since you know nothin about engines, you cannot understand a good engine builder is the one who deserves the credit. A skilled engine builder can make an obselete 304 AMC run well.
And, let's not forget these cars have drivers who deserve most of the credit, not Government Motors.


Longest lasting ? If you used a truck like we do, you'd see how incorrect you are. Chevy frames come apart , fatigue and crack with the use we put 'em through. Fords do not. My convictions are based off real world use doing real work, not commercials. Bring your 1/2 ton 305 wimptruck down to the 'Zarks and I'll have that thing folded in half with the weight I throw in it. If anthing is the longest lasting truck, it's those old International trucks.
If commercials were true Champ every fat woman that got in Jenny Craig would look like a swimsuit model in 6 months

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

... Next thing you know, they're rewriting automotive history...

[MikeNoun]

Yes, Richard Petty's 1969 year at Ford, a year he'd like to forget. Ford backed a dump truck full of money up to King Richard, and despite having the most well-funded team in NASCAR, and a virtually limitless amount of financial help from Ford, he did worse in 1969 driving a sleek Ford than he did driving his boxy 1968 Plymouth Road Runner.

Thankfully, Petty went back to Plymouth in 1970, and went back to his winning ways.

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

I don't know much about dirt track racin' (usally it's all white trash at those events)...

You're right - you don't know much about dirt track racin'. You're comment about "white trash" only shows that you know less than what I thought.

Ignorance is bliss - and you sure are very blissfull...

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by The Champ

You're right - you don't know much about dirt track racin'. You're comment about "white trash" only shows that you know less than what I thought.

Ignorance is bliss - and you sure are very blissfull...

Ive been to enough tracks to know that's usually what you see. Plenty of toothless trailer park hicks with women/wives they picked up at a barnyard auction

Ignorance ? Yea, so says the one who doesn't understand it's the builder of the car (and the driver) moreso then the manufacturer. And if you knew much about circle tracks, you'd know certain guys regardless of what they drive have their buddies at certain tracks who will rule in their favor. I'd bet money if the Ford engine I built came to your neck of the woods and beat your precious Chebby, you'd be crying for a strip search of the car

But, keep cryin Chump, it amuses me.

[goatwgn]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

Aint that the truth ! Chebby people think Chebby invented and did everything, is the only answer and Ive heard plenty slam Poontiac as bad as they do Ford.

Went to a Ford show last summer in the T/A and showed a few after talking Pontiac with a few. They all had a Pontiac story, and ended up showing a few the T/A. When asked if it Chebby powered I popped the hood, and got thumbs up

I once saw a Olds 455 Toronado powered railbuggy and overheard a Chebby guy say "A Corvair engine would have been better, it has more torque, because it's a Chevy"

Over the years I have seen many a "Chevy" fanatic slam Pontiac (and Oldsmobile) a lot more than I have heard Ford fanatics slam them. That is one of the reasons why I would rather walk down the street carrying a Pontiac hubcap than drive a Chevy.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

Yes, Richard Petty's 1969 year at Ford, a year he'd like to forget. Ford backed a dump truck full of money up to King Richard, and despite having the most well-funded team in NASCAR, and a virtually limitless amount of financial help from Ford, he did worse in 1969 driving a sleek Ford than he did driving his boxy 1968 Plymouth Road Runner.

Thankfully, Petty went back to Plymouth in 1970, and went back to his winning ways.

That’s really OK. What Petty couldn’t do, David Pearson, et al, managed to just fine… with the car that started the Wing Wars in NASCAR.
ala: The Daytona Charger created for Richard Petty bc the Charger 500’s performed so poorly compared to Fords Torino Talladegas…

[Diego]

"Wing Wars" is a misnomer. How about "Aero Wars?"

In that case, the Charger 500 started the war. Ford responded with the T and the Spoiler II, then Chrysler returned with the Daytona and, in '70, the Superbird.

[MikeNoun]

Yep, David Pearson was one of my all-time favorites, although he only racked about half as many victories as King Richard.

Curious, how many 1969 Ford Torino Talladega's did they make with the Boss 429 engine? You know, the one that sat under the hood of David Pearson's Ford?

Over in the Chrysler camp, Buddy Baker took his 426 Hemi-powered Dodge Charger, you know, the factory car with the factory engine, hence the name "stock car", to Talladega in March 1970. He became the first driver (and car) to break 200 mph on a closed course.



That record didn't last long, because Bobby Isaac took another 1969 Dodge Daytona, you know, the factory production Dodge Daytona with the Hemi engine, to Talladega a few months later, and beat Baker's record.

Then Isaac went to the Bonneville Salt Flats, and proceeded to set 28 world class records, many of those records STILL exist today.



Have you lost in a Ford lately?

[Alvin]

History shows, beginning in 1968, that Ford was ahead of the pack…

The second-generation Dodge Charger was a good-looking car by anyone's standards, but proved to be aerodynamically inefficient. With blunt grilles inducing drag and tunneled rear windows causing lift, they were unable to reach speeds necessary to win on NASCAR racetracks. Throughout the 1968 season, Dodge finished behind the Ford Torinos and Mercury Cyclones. Unable to pull more power from the already mighty Hemi engine, engineers began developing a more slippery body.

Working throughout 1968, Chrysler's Special Vehicles Group designed and built a smoothed version of the production Charger, with a flatter, Coronet grille and rear window moved flush with the roofline. Called the Charger 500, it proved to be a half step toward their ultimate goal. 500 were built in accordance with NASCAR rules. Ford continued to win on the big NASCAR tracks, including the 1969 Daytona 500. Dodge engineers went back to the wind tunnel for testing.

Midway through 1969, Dodge took the Charger 500 and added an 18-inch nose and chin spoiler. The hood and front fenders were modeled after the upcoming 1970 Charger, with the flush rear window of the Charger 500 retained. Reverse scoops on both front fenders further reduced drag. The Charger Daytona came out of the wind tunnel with a drag coefficient (cd) of 0.28.

On-track testing revealed the pointed nose gave the car the down-force engineers were looking for, but the rear end lifted at high speeds. To solve this, a large wing was mounted to the back of the car, bolted through the rear quarter panels and into the rear subframe. The wing was made 23 inches tall so the trunk lid could be opened without hitting the bottom of the wing. Aside from adding additional down-force, the wing helped give the car directional stability.

http://www.classic-car-history.com/d...na-history.htm