Shane Stack's 25.2 Drag Radial Monte Carlo

[John_Heard]

David our esteemed Chassis Section moderator just finished up a rebuild on Shane Stack's Monte..

Pics @ http://www.davidlemmond.com/stack/index.html

Looks awesome David!!!

[TubbedTruck67]

Thats some awesome work! That monte flys too!

[vegaracer]

Thats some nice work. Is that considered a stock frame rail car?

[gmracing355]

Looks great. I wish i wasnt poor,lol
Greg

[Mike Peters]

Thats some nice work. Is that considered a stock frame rail car?

Looks like there's a little bit left of the stock frame rails for rule purposes but, doubt that qualifies as stock suspension anymore. It does look good though.....

[David Lemmond]

Thanks guys! Yes it's a shame that it has come down to having to build cars like this to be competitive. If you don't think ahead and build a car pushing every rules limit, you'll have to be constantly redoing the car. Kinda the lead, follow or get out of the way principle. haha Shanes runs ORSCA limited street mostly, which allows a car to be completly backhalved. Outlaw drag radials rules are relaxed alot. So we had to build it to the best of both worlds.
Shane was on the phone with Donald Long alot to make sure this would be legal for his races.

[Mike Peters]

Once again, excellent craftsmanship Mr. Lemmond. Mr. Stack has built himself a reputation in the drag radial world as a key player. Don't take this as any criticism but, I wonder if I had called Donald Long asking for the same concessions in rules interpretation if he would have allowed me to build such a car as Mr. Stack's? I suppose the Scranton's Mustang is now allowed also? The perversion of the class is at a point of no return. The fans love to see the huge #'s these guys are running while exhibiting their brilliant tuning skills by putting so much power through a DOT-approved tire to run 6's. So, now that the Outlaw portion of drag radial is out of reach for the mere mortal, why not do away with silly rules such as requiring those useless remainents called frame rails which visually detract from an otherwise stellar job of chassis work. Stack's Monte is just a gnat's azz away from a fabbed 4-link car. Were the rules Donald Long allowed specific of the angles for the suspension links so they remained in a triangulated factory design? Maybe this isn't something you are at liberty to answer.

[David Lemmond]

Thanks for the comps Mike! I don't take it as criticism.
Yes, I think Donald would have let you build your car like this if asked. I think he, like anyone that actually gets out and runs this stuff seriously, realizes that having the stock floor pan in the rear of the car means nothing for performance. What it does do, is allow us the change the car to a full limited street ride, by cutting out the rest of the stock suspension, put in a real four link and not have to redo the whole back of the car. I've said all along to just do away with some of these silly rules and lets race. Scrantons car was more radical in that, the frame rails where not really attached to anything allowing it to sit way lower,and the "S" box was relocated higher in the car. So to answer your question, I would say no, it would not be legal in my opinion. And further, we would not care if it were legal. We just want to race.
How do you feel that Outlaw radial is out of reach? Because of the power combo's allowed or because of cars built like this? Dave Hances car went in the 6's, and it's nothing like this. Kevin Fiscus has been 4.60 in the eighth and it's not built like this either. Point is, you can still run the number with a car that has stock floor pans
As for the upper control arm brackets in the front, they are no different that what an "S" box is for a Mustang. No-one offers an "S" box for a G-body, so we made one. Ya they are tweaked a little to get the control arm off the pumpkin of the housing, but there again, thats done on a lot of Mustangs. It's still a triangulated setup, we don't need a wishbone to keep the rear in place.

[Mike Peters]

Thanks for the response David. Yeah, I'm feelin' that the Outlaw stuff is out of reach for the average "entry level" racer. I find it a bit humorous when Hance can pull the engine out of the drag radial car to put it in his Pro Mod to go racing. Remember when this was supposed to be an entry level class? Of course I completely understand the nature of this beast called Heads-Up Racing. I'm way over my comfort level in spending in the build of my car to go race for local $1K top prize money. I am very glad to see a guy like D. Long put forth the effort to offer a very respectable purse. That's awesome $$$$. Anyone building a heads-up car knows the headaches of inconsistent rules from organization to organization. I can see when an event like D. Long's ORTC is held with all that money on the line, the rules have to try to emcompass as many of the top of the food chain in drag radial type cars to see who truly is the baddest of the bad. Is Scranton's car going to be allowed to race in the event in spite of the infractions you mentioned? Will Donald allow the Berry/Dillard car? They've been testing on DR's lately. In your opinion, what are the bare minimum rules that should be set for O/L DR that will still keep the insanity in check? Obviously, when the title of the class says, "Outlaw", it's pretty much anything you can afford on the engine rules.

[Ls7camaro]

I've seen his car on HP TV, He does the quarter faster than I can do the eight. I call that car a #2. Because by the time I launch he is already at the drive through getting a double cheeseburger and Fries, and back to the finish line before I shift.

[David Lemmond]

Mike, I don't know what the rules need to be to allow all cars. I'd like to see them allow a true back half. I don't think it would cost much, if any more, and would be no faster than a well built "stock" suspension car. This would let every car have the same opportunity to race and be competitive. A leaf spring car has no chance. Some cars can't get the big radial under the car without moving the suspension. It would just be nice to see all cars be able to race.

[Mike Peters]

Mike, I don't know what the rules need to be to allow all cars. I'd like to see them allow a true back half. I don't think it would cost much, if any more, and would be no faster than a well built "stock" suspension car. This would let every car have the same opportunity to race and be competitive. A leaf spring car has no chance. Some cars can't get the big radial under the car without moving the suspension. It would just be nice to see all cars be able to race.

I do hope there are some promoters out there who are willing to offer the non-Outlaw cars a place to race and fans who are willing to appreciate it. I know the fans probably prefer the fastest cars to watch with the understanding of rules limitations. You are probably right in allowing back-halved cars to compete against the late model aerodynamic short wheelbase cars since ride height can be factor at these horsepower levels. I would rather see stock suspension required and weight penalties for wheelbases than to open it up to back-halved cars. I'm not trying to offend anyone but, I'd really like to see something besides Fox bodies and 3rd and 4th Gen GM F-bodies always at the top. How many of those Mustangs did Ford build anyway? It's a hard balance to try to achieve.

[David Lemmond]

Well thats what I'd like to see, more than just Mustangs and newer Camaros. Thats why I said that the backhalf stuff would even it out. Maybe ladder bars only?

[Mike Peters]

Well thats what I'd like to see, more than just Mustangs and newer Camaros. Thats why I said that the backhalf stuff would even it out. Maybe ladder bars only?

I could live with ladder bars on these limited tires and maybe limited to only the factory leaf spring cars as an option? Nothing like a factory-looking '69 Camaro to add class to the class. What do you think of maybe a weight break for the older body styles to address the aerodynamic and wheelbase advantages of the belly-button cars? Plus, no added torque arms like Wolfe's. I'd like to see at least some kind of incentive to make the older body styles an appealing option. What's your opinion on Paul Major's 'Vette and his "bolt-on" suspension? Should we allow a totally new suspension design to be used in a body that has some obvious advantages?