The Great 2010 NMCA Rule Controversy
It all started on the evening of January 12th — when I'd noticed a post on the NMCA forum about rule changes. This had caught me by surprise as I'd thought the rules had been announced finalized once already — and so I clicked the link.
To my surprise, I noted four changes of note:
First – 59-64 Chevys now allowed to run the 396-427 Rat Motors. I felt that to be a pretty major deal that not only would change history of the ratio of older Chevys running now that they had the least expensive horse power in NSS — but that it opened up a can of worms like Thunderbolts running 460s pulled from Lincolns. Once there — what's next? Rat motors in Olds/Pontiac/Buicks because they all are GMs?
While I favor Mopar, I do appreciate Ford and GM and I am not a hater. It's just that as I've spent more an more time in NSS, I've become more and more wanting to not reform any existing rules considered imperfect — but to also not make the changes that continue to lead up to yet more changes. This year to year evolution to make an allowance for a friend with clout, will sooner or later have NSS like NASCAR having a NSS Toyota Car of Tomorrow — looking nothing like NSS did when first envisioned!
Second – 61 Tempests added to the 62-67 Tempests/LeMans. Again, I'm not a hater — one of my favorite cars was my 63 Pontiac with a 326. However, my understanding was that NSS was going to stay with the engine family available to the car the year it was built. Frankly the 62 Tempest was a mistake — because it wasn't until 1963 that the tempest had a Pontiac V8 engine. In 1961 and 1962, most all of the Tempests/LeMans had a 195 ci (half of a 389) "Trophy 4" I-4. The only optional V8 offered in the 62 and 63 was the rarely installed (I think 56 total) 215ci, borrowed from Buick. Look it up. So in my opinion, one mistake (allowing a 62), opened the door for another mistake. I know this is not a big deal to most people — and since the 61-63s all look alike to me, I've not lost sleep over it. However, the bigger deal is the can of worms it opens by being the basis of justifications for yet more deviations from the original intentions.
Personally, I think the correct think to do is to call all of them (since they look the same and no one checks VINs) 63's, make the small trim change if there is one — and remove the reference to 61-62. It shouldn't be too had to disguise a 61 as a 63. I've never seen VIN checks or requirements to present a title.
As hard as it might be for most to believe, I spent most of my life as a business executive — and the wording of a contract or agreement either preserved the intention — or opened a big can of worms. It is always the best move to get it correct — instead of leaving it for multiple interpretations or conflicts of intentions. If we're to want to stay with the tradition and intention of correct engine families — then you can't feel like it is acceptable for a Tempest that should have a Buick small block to have a Pontiac 389/421 — but not acceptable for a 63 Ford to have a Lincoln 460. You just can't have it both ways and say you're for stopping the evolution from the original spirit of the class.
Third – AMX's allowed to run a single 4bbl. I wasn't losing sleep over this one — but I do happen to know that this is a thorn in the side of some of the people who been around longer than I. My understanding was that when someone wanted to have an AMC Pony car in NSS (the Hemi Darts and Barracudas were Compacts), a lot of people felt like this going to open the doors to Camaros and Mustangs. Technically, the AMX was a Sports Car — and there wasn't any of those in NSS either. Politics as usual prevailed — and it was agreed to allow the AMX (but not the Javelin), provided they used the Group 16 2X4 Drag Racing Intake and a pair of Carters.
For the last couple of years NMCA has allowed an AMX with a single 4bbl to run — and this has been a thorn in the side of many drivers, especially when that "Overlooked Car" won the Championship. I'll be honest with you, I knew nothing about this history until a few months ago — and didn't understand what the problem was when drivers were complaining about the car. However, it again appears that one bad move (as many of the old timers in NSS feel) led to not only another bad move — but a broken promise.
Lastly – Sticker Placement. NMCA wants the stickers on the side and rear windows, because they're trying to go for the clean "Street Car" look in the Fastest Street Car classes. That said — NSS has never had a clean look, and to the contrary track promoters initially complained about the lack of period correct graphics and stickers when the NSS class started. Virtually every other sanctioning body that had contingency stickers accepts them being on the sides of NSS cars. There was a big movement to "Standardize" the NSS rules, and the standard was to be the sides of cars to be acceptable. NMCA's rules never reflected that — and there was inconsistent opinions and rulings when it came time for those stickers to be approved or paid off. I'd submitted a request through the proper channels (as requested) of the rules committee, with the justifications (the fact that we're also not a "Heads Up" class — and need our side and back windows). I read the rules as being that the stickers had be on the rear quarter windows or back windows only — which frankly pissed me off. I felt this was one bone NMCA could have rolled to NSS.
This was after midnight, and although I hadn't been drinking — it was most likely the wrong time for me to respond. My response was:
OooooWeeee. NSS rules now allow Rat motors in 59-64 Chevys, single 4bbl carbs on AMXs, and the only rules to force NSS cars to run their stickers on the windows. I wonder who y'all consulted in NSS for this? This ought to be the final nail in the coffin for quite a few of the NSS guys that were sitting on the fence.
Looks like it will be less competition for me this year — and against Chevys with the wrong motors. It also would appear that the Universal NSS rule thing is no longer going to be a reality — as I can't imagine any of the guys on the rule committee agreeing to that crap.
Hell let's go to tunnel rams, Dominators, Pro-stock hood scoops, transbrakes, NOS, and electronics too. How about mufflers — you guys forgot that one.
Maybe we can call the class SNSS for Semi-Nostalgia Super Stock.
OK — while maybe the most intelligent response — NMCA's policy has always been "Book Closed on Rules for this year".
I then created a thread about the changes, and emailed a link to the rules to the few NSS email addresses I have. By 6AM, I had a PM from a Tech Representative from the NMCA justifying the 396-427 engine, telling to stop my complaining, and making some crack about the the legality of the Hemi in a AA/SA car I'd just bought. By 10AM, the NMCA posted that the 396-427 was a "typographical error". An hour or two later, they'd removed a post of mine from the thread — leaving the posts afterward, causing some confusion. A post from another NMCA official told me that I shouldn't post my complaints in public — but instead should use the phone. I never answered, as I think I'm done will visiting that board, but I've had face to face conversations with many NMCA people, have talked on the phone with many, and have emailed through channels — and yet never had anything resolved. I have been told that NSS is considered to have too many grumpy old men, and that Charlie Harmon doesn't care at all about NSS. In Charlie's defense, he's always been nice to me, and bent over backward to accommodate me — so I don't know if that is the opinion of one NMCA person, or if if Charlie has indeed said indicated he could careless about NSS.
Next, was a post from the 6-Member Rule Committee of the NSNSSA stating that they were consulted and agreed to the AMX and Tempest changes, was not consulted about the stickers, and was informed that the Rat Motor change was a "Typo".
UPDATE: I have now clicked on the rules, and while there is no change for the AMX or Pontiacs — the 396-427 "Typographical Error" disappeared, and in its place is the Z-11 427. For those who don't know — the Z-11 Chevrolet was built in 1963 only — and had a 409 W Motor that displaced 427CI. I'm a little confused as to why it was mentioned. Unless I'm missing something, that motor was already covered because it was a 409 and cubic inch displacement isn't a tech item. It is sort of like giving special mention to the Max-Wedge engines — when they're covered as a Wedge engine already. Not being a Chevy expert — so if the engine is actually so radically different from the 409 to require special mention — shouldn't it be a 63 only motor, as the Hemi Darts and Hemi Barracudas are 68/69? I don't know — I just ask as I'm confused over the point needing to be made.
The updated rules also now allows for the contingency stickers to be placed on the lower rear quarters of the sides of the cars.
For the Future: I'm really not so sure how much I'll be updating on NMCA events, as I appear to have worn out my welcome with them. Dallas has actually taken this more personal than I — and says he doesn't want to run the series, so may take one or more years off — depending on other options.
Speaking of other options: The NSS Racing Event site, currently list 18 NSS events for 2010. I know of two others that will happen in Texas that are not yet announced — and I was led to believe that there was going to be a mid-west series that included Kansas City, maybe Bowling Green, and possibly include the Monster in the points. If you have knowledge of these events and dates — please list them at http://nssracing.ning.com/events. If properly used — this can be the one-stop place to go to for planning your 2010 racing calendar.
Finally: I've been doing some heavy lobbying with the newly reformed AHRA to include NSS. I've been conversing with the President of the AHRA via email — and posting to their forums — and on the 12th the AHRA posted on their forum "OldHippie, You are quite the lobbyist. Your class is in the works. " I'll share what I know, when I know it.