1960s ford and mercurys. E.T.

[fairlanegt427]

Looking for answer to todays modern engine parts, components etc.  compared to the 1960s technology.  one thing I cant grasp is with all this technology into these engines and parts,  which in the 1960s they weren't even close to technology (obviously) .  that includes tires also.  the modern day upgrades we can do to our fe power cars and I still cant run the same et's , than dyno don amongst other legends that drove factory sponsored ford/mercury door cars.  what am I and or we drag racers doing wrong?

[cjshaker]

I would respectfully, but strongly, disagree. Todays Super Stockers and Stockers are running MUCH faster than back in the day. Rules have changed over the years of course, but not enough to account for the big ET drops. It's all about the modern technology and understanding of what actually happens in the engines.

Quick example: Rusty Gillis (a member of this forum, and showing his current build on the Members Projects page) set the SS/GA record back in 1974 at 11.26 in his 1969 Mustang. The current record holder in SS/GA is Tony Hewes at 9.46....in a 1969 Mustang.

As far as the Pro drivers, the records don't even compare to back in the day. They run much faster times today, in the order of over 2 seconds faster. As far as yours or my car not running the same numbers, well, that just comes down to our abilities. Those guys had a HUGE collective knowledge, immense passion and lived, ate and breathed to race. Not to mention sheer talent. Those are hard combinations to beat no matter how much technology you have to your advantage.

[bn69stang]

Well said Doug , we all have watched et s drop over the years , seems like they will keep dropping as the after market grows with all the new parts . .Bud

[fairlanegt427]

i guess what im saying is that im expecting the et's to be dropping by leaps and bounds,  with the current technology used. plus the tracks, tires and suspension are so much better now, hence the ss/gg cars i feel should be low nine to high  eights.  for example my car which i havent drove yet, so hard for me to say yet,  but with all these desktop dyno machines and current and former drag racing friends showing me numbers on my car,  it should be 9.4 to 9.5 area. which is fast for me.  i guess im just expecting by leaps and bounds.lol.   i just have a ton of respect for the dyno dons,  sox and martins etc etc. they literally didnt have much to go buy,  but they sure made it all work.

[Rory428]

Improvments in chassis and tire technoledgy have made a huge differeance, even with using new engine tech.For example, my all steel Fairmont runs about the same ETs as Dyno Dons Pro Stock 427 SOHC powered 70 Maverick did in 1970. Dynos Maverick had fiberglass fenders and hood, and may or may not have been acid dipped. I don`t know what compression his Cammer had, but I have to think is was much higher than my approx 11.5, he had dual dominators, I have a single 780 vac, on a Ford dual plane intake, stock CJ iron heads, and a flat tappet cam. Do I think my 428 or 427 made more power than a P/S Earl Wade SOHC? Absolutely not, Dyno likely would out MPH me by a fair bit, but between tires and clutch development, I bet the older cars were losing a few tenths, especially in the first 3 gears. And hell, the flat  tappet, flat top piston, pump gas 331SB Ford in my Mustang has gone almost as quick as my buddys old E/Gas Pinto, which was an ex Pro Stocker with a Gapp & Roush Hi port headed, big roller cammed, tunnel rammed 9500 RPM Boss 302 with a Nash 5 speed, and was a fair bit lighter to boot.

[TomP]

Don't forget track prep too. I think if Dyno Don's Maverick was launching on today's prepped tracks it'd be quicker... if the headers didn't crush completely flat upon landing.