Story by Mark Davis / Photos by Kevin Thorne
Article originally printed in the Racing Milestones Magazine April 1999

As we jump into our car construction, many issues come to mind. But, first let’s get clear on some things. When 1 was very young, an uncle told me a story about interrogating Germans in World War II. He spoke German fluently, but many German officers refused to communicate with my uncle and he felt that his communication skills in a foreign tongue were doomed. One of the lead interrogators took him aside and explained that he spoke the language perfectly, but there was a difference in speaking in one language and thinking in another. He suggested he think in German. My uncle followed his advice and gained valuable inside information on many German objectives.

Racing is the same. Talking racing and thinking racing are two different things.

Race engineering has changed a great deal in just a few years. Winston Cup, Busch Grand National and Craftsman Trucks share a common chassis that has its roots in the 1960s. In the past, many successful crew chiefs built and campaigned cars, winning many races by using trial and error. Working once with legendary crew chief and chassis guru Herb Nab, 1 realized that it’s possible to get good results without understanding the cause. Nab was preparing a Daytona car for an upcoming race by diligently aligning the front end and then pushing the car over a three-foot-wide strip of paper lying in front of the car. “If it wrinkles the paper it scrubs off speed,” he said. 1 asked what caused it to wrinkle, and he answered, “1 don’t really know, but 1 got it to quit doing it.”

The car led many laps in the July race with young Doug Heavron driving, and was leading when the flywheel bolts broke, putting the car out of the race.
Today’s crew chiefs are more precise in documenting causes. As each cause is pinpointed, they use new technology to enhance results. To understand what’s involved in choosing the chassis and build¬ing a certain type of car, and to understand what crew chiefs do to enhance perfor¬mance, you need to be up to speed on technical terms and their history. For that mat¬ter, you need to know these words just to follow race telecasts.

Here’s a good shot of the rear of your average downforce car. Notice the upper surface area on the quarters. 5poilers this size produce plenty of downforce. Spoiler size and angle often are mandated by NASCAR.

Chassis Terms:
Front steer - a term used to designate the location of steering components rela¬tive to front wheels.

Bump steer - the amount of change of toe in or toe out when suspension travels up or down.

Ride height - the designed height for a chassis to race at. This height is mea¬sured at frame comers.

Rake - the amount of change in ride height from left to right and front to rear.

Center of gravity - an imaginary line that runs front to rear at the car’s perfect center of mass.

Footprint - the amount in square inches that each tire touches the earth. Larger footprints enhance tire grip to track. Four equal footprints with equal applied forces would promote great tire wear and vehicle handling.

Upper A-Arm - the link that fastens the spindle top to ball joint as an assembly to the chassis.

Lower A-Arm - the other link for the lower part of this independent front suspension. The length and location of these A-Arms establish the perimeters known as front-end geometry.

Camber gain - the amount of angle change in front spindles as suspension travels inward or outward from the center of the car. Camber changes can be used to maximize footprint when needed.

Static camber - the amount of camber set in the vehicle initially when the front end is aligned. Camber settings change from track to track, depending on weight transfer, track surface, loads on the chassis, etc.

Caster – the angle of a spindle frontward or rearward. Caster stagger is the dif¬ference between the static caster set¬tings; it affects the amount of pull to the right or left a driver experiences. The more caster stagger, the more the vehicle pulls or steers.

Spindle - the component the front hub assembly attaches to, which allows the wheel to bolt to the hub. Spindles not
only suspend the chassis from the wheel, but also turn, allowing corner¬ing. Spindle height, steering arm loca¬tion, pin height and king pin control many perimeters in the front end.

Ackerman - a tern1 used to describe the difference in turning radius of each front wheel. Simply, the left will turn more than the right wheel, allowing for the difference in comer radius.

Scrub - the amount of force exerted on the tire footprint due to the different location of tire center or pivot and the actual pivot of the spindle.

Wheel offset - the back spacing from the hub surface to the rim of the wheel. All NASCAR touring divisions have four and one-half inches back spacing.

Wheelbase - the length between axle center line and spindle center line front.

Lead - a term associated with wheelbase, indicating that one side is longer or leading the other.

Track bar - a locating device that centers the rear axle in the chassis.

Truck arm - a torque arm-trailing arm combination that evolved from the early Chevy pickup. The truck arm pivots freely at the cross member and solidly on the rear end.

This fabricator is fitting the A-pillar on a Taurus downforce car. Note the width of the A-pillar base and flatness of the front fenders. Below: This is a normal truck arm setup: The truck arm is an I-beam using a spherical bearing to attach to the frame.
It mounts solidly to rear with U-bolts.

Steering ratio - determined by the amount the steering wheel turns in relationship to the wheels. Drivers often get used to turning the steering wheel a certain amount. Turning more or less disrupts rhythm; therefore many ratios have been developed for different length turns.

Roll center - a dynamic point determined by geometry, relative to the center of gravity in a car.

Front roll center - the angle of A-Arm projection points, combined with cen­ter of tread projection points drawn to a common point. After establishing left points and right points, the con­necting points are the actual roll center of the car. This point can be right or left of center, low or high, and can be changed by upper A-Arm angles, lower angles, ride height, component lengths, tire size, wheel spacers and tread width. All affect handling char­acteristics. Drop snouts or raised snouts define the location of the front clip to the side rails of the chassis and determine component location and roll centers.

Rear roll center - located simply at the center of the track bar from the ground and center from the right to left mounting points. Roll centers are mea­sured from the ground, but are relative to center of gravity. Higher roll centers exert less mechanical advantage, so lower spring rates can control roll or weight transfer.

Now, that was a quick lesson in chassis terminology, but you also need to know body talk.
Car Body:

Downforce - the amount of force exerted downward on a car by wind force. It is related to speed.

Drag - the force that uses up energy as horsepower as an object is propelled though the wind.

Balance - a term that aero engineers use to describe downforce, front to rear. Balance also is used to explain the sit­uation in a perfect world when the least amount of drag is produced for the most downforce exerted.

Air dam - the front valance of the vehicle that produces downforce while direct­ing air flow around the car.

Spoiler - a device located on the rear of the car’s deck lid. Subtle changes in spoilers can affect a car’s total bal­ance. Downforce cars are specially built to produce maximum downforce while traveling through the air. Virtually all cars with the exception of restrictor plate cars are versions of downforce cars with small changes for each track type.

A -pillars - the body pillars located next to the windshield.

B-pillars - the body pillars located behind the side window.

C-pillars - the body pillars located next to the rear glass.

Cowls - the closures that seal the hood to the base of the windshield. Air box openings are located in the cowl.

Aero push - an understeer condition caused when a car pulls closely into another car’s air stream. Taking the air is a term used when the downforce is broken by a car beside or behind a car.

Drafting - a term used to explain the phenomenon that occurs when a group of cars hooks together in a train, fool­ing the air by breaking the wind with one surface, which lessens downforce and drag force because these are exert­ed over a number of cars.

This is the standard front steer configuration. This CJR steering box comes in many ratios from 12: 1 to 20: 1. Below: This is a typical Winston Cup independent front suspension assembly. Notice the components. Remember the length and angles of each car change geometry totally.

Bump drafting - a version of drafting in which one car bumps another. The ini¬tial contact breaks downforce and drag forces momentarily, giving the lead car as much as 100 more usable horse¬power, rocketing it away from the pack without totally breaking the draft.

Duct work - the enclosures sealing heat exchangers, radiators, oil coolers, etc. while forcing cool air to flow through
each. Brake ducts direct cool air through hoses to cool rotors under rac¬ing conditions. The more openings in the front of the air dam, grilles, etc. lessen the amount of downforce pro¬duced and increase drag. Teams not only control critical water-temperature and oil-temperature numbers, but can tailor handling by the addition or sub¬traction of tape on noses.

As the car construction process starts, it is easy to see just by reviewing the termi¬nology that weight management, roll cen¬ters, front geometry choices, body dynam¬ics and component choices are all impor¬tant decisions.
Next month we’ll start the chassis con¬struction. The car that we plan to build is a short, flat track car that will unitize standard frame perimeters used by many Winston Cup teams.
So, think about the terminology and see if you can decide what characteristics we will employ in next month’s chassis construction.

Our thanks to Hutcherson-Pagan Enter¬prises and the Bill Elliott Racing Team for opening their facilities for photos.

Story by Mark Davis / Photos by Kevin Thorne
Article originally printed in the Racing Milestones Magazine March 1999

Pull out your notebooks, sharpen your pencils, grab your checkbooks, call your accountants and whatever you do, don’t tell your wife. We are going to build a Winston Cup stock car. For the next year, we’ll lay out the chassis, components, bodies, paint and graphics, safety systems and even the test procedures. We will cover the basic materials used, while outlining construction techniques throughout the car building process.

There is a lot of planning that goes on in team offices long before the first car in a racing fleet is built. First, owners must decide where to put their focus. That is, which tracks offer their driver the greatest chance of victory. Developing a strong Winston Cup team starts at the team’s point of expertise. Team strengths and driver strengths determine this. Road racers concentrate on road courses; short track drivers look to short tracks; flat track teams put effort into flat tracks.

The car at the top is a short track car. Short track cars can be easily identified by the grille work, which incorporates brake ducts used to air cool brakes. The car below, which also came from the Elliott¬Marino stable, is an intermediate car, which incorporates much smaller grille work. Both cars display similar aerodynamic features.

Sponsors often become part of this equation by sponsoring races at a track close to their corporate offices. These races allow sponsors to wine and dine associates and nothing is better than their team winning in conjunction with corporate happenings. Some teams put 200 percent eff0l1 in these races. Specialized cars are built to exploit these strong opportunities.

In planning the Winston Cup fleet, teams are confronted with the issue of back-up cars. For years, qualifying for races meant out-timing only 40 cars. Using “old” or “second string” race cars for back-up cars did not interfere with making races.

But today, one car per track is not enough. Teams now prepare two equally matched cars for each race. These cars are mirror images of each other and therefore are completely ready to qualify or race, if the need arises. Since they are identical twins, teams can change the setup on the back-up car to match a damaged or disabled car in a short period of time.

Above: This cage being welded at Hutcherson-Pagan, has hundreds of continuous welds. Right: The material used in the average Winston Cup chassis consists of 150 feet of roll bar tube, 40 feet of 2-by-3 tube, 12 feet of 3-by-4 tube, and three 4-feet-by-10-feet sheets of 22¬gauge sheet metal, 100 pounds of flat Stock brackets and 200 hundred man-hours of labor.

In addition, cars must be designed for each track. New-generation crew chiefs surround themselves with talent in many areas. Engineers dealing with aerodynamics and chassis play a big part in car choices. Special engineering designs establish proper component placement and geometry used in the preparation of race cars. Component placement changes for each track. Flat tracks, road courses, restrictor plate tracks, concrete surfaces and high-banked speedways all have certain personalities. Aero packages, bodies, duct work, spoilers, air boxes all have to match chassis packages.

Some tracks have similar characteristics, which allow teams to develop race car packages that work at each track. For example, Daytona International Speedway and Talladega Superspeedway; Pocono International Speedway, Indianapolis Motor Speedway and New Hampshire International Speedway; Charlotte Motor Speedway, Atlanta Motor Speedway and Michigan Speedway; Dover Downs International Speedway and Bristol Motor Speedway; Sears Point International Speedway and Watkins Glen International Speedway require similar setups.

With the large number of cars needed to meet the team’s needs, owners realize that work must be sublet or subcontracted to other sources. Hendrick Motorsports, at this time, is the only totally self-supporting Winston Cup team. Even the largest teams buy chassis and sublet bodies, headers, graphics, and more.

By the early 1970s, teams began relying on chassis manufacturers to produce surface plate cars setting competition standards. Banjo’s Performance Center and Hutcherson-Pagan manufactured 90 percent of cars raced. Today, Hutcherson, Laughlin Racing Products and Ronny Hopkins Race Car produce 80 percent of all cars raced in Winston Cup.

As technology sharpens, car owners have found that current successful crew chiefs call on both chassis engineers and aerodynamics engineers to create databases that establish design criteria for programs using designated geometries such as roll centers, Ackerman, bump steer, ride heights, instant centers, scrub radius and so on.

Crew chiefs call on chassis builders that are user friendly to the team for chassis designs, and established aerodynamics engineers match chassis, track and body. Down force, lift, coefficient of drag, along with all forms of air management, establish base lines for competition. Team owners choose chassis builders on many merits: workmanship, availability, ability to turn around repairs, confidentiality in design and cost.

The average Winston Cup chassis can cost as much as $8,000.

Teams experience problems producing racing bodies in-house as well. Bodies hung in-house take 300 man-hours of labor each. When dealing with a fleet of 10 cars, teams realize 3,000 man-hours of labor. Limited fabricators on staff make subletting bodies cost effective. The average Winston Cup body costs around $8,500, which only includes body placement and exterior panel development. Aluminum crush panels, window treatments, duct work and bracketry cost another $4,000.

Refinishing race cars is very material intensive. Paint, material and graphics cost as much as $3,000 per project. Refinishing the interior, the exterior, preparation of the car, and graphics placement takes about 100 man-hours of labor at a cost of about 4,000.

Let’s review. From chassis to refinishing, along with assembly labor, a car takes about 800 man-hours. Chassis manufacturers claim about 200 man-hours of labor are needed to produce the chassis and components. This means 1,000 man-hours of labor are needed per car to develop it from the chassis to the track. That, times 14 cars, equals 14,000 man-hours of labor. Divide that by eight off-season weeks and it equals 1,750 hours of labor per week. Divide that by a SO-hour workweek and a team needs 35 employees. Boy, we need to take a breath!

The average Winston Cup car takes about $35,000 worth of labor and $35,000 worth of parts, making each Winston Cup car built in-house worth about $70,000. This number can increase up to $100,000 if the car has been totally sublet. Quite an investment!

With these topics in mind, building Winston Cup cars into successful teams takes serious thought in chassis components and bodies. A mistake in choice can cost tremendous amounts of time and money.

Front steer chassis moved Winston Cup cars into. the future. The steering box location is in front of the engine cross-member. Moving steering aut of the engine bay area allows engine builders to perfect exhaust systems, and change ail pump, oil pan combinations into. valuable horsepower.

Our thanks to Hutcherson-Pagan Enterprises and the Bill Elliott Racing Team for opening their facilities for photos.

I’ve decided to post some of my tech articles printed in the Racing Milestones Magazines dating back to March 1999 when I was the director of the Bobby Isaac Motorsports Program at Catawba Valley Community College in Hickory NC. The series of articles titled Building A Race Car chronicles the building of a NASCAR race car from the chassis up. Hope you enjoy!
Mark

Location. Location. Location. Being involved in a family business in Florida, then relocating to North Carolina I quickly realized that where you do business directly affects your bottom line. The hot rod industry shop rates are all over the map just like the shops. I have guys doing the same quality builds that vary $50 an hour in shop rate. Overhead affects the baseline costs as much as anything, the costs you can’t change rent, utilities, taxes, all dictate the cost of operation. A 5,000 sq. foot shop in Mooresville, North Carolina will cost $2,000 a month, that same shop in the country in Kentucky will cost $800 a month. In Orlando, FL, the shop cost is close to the NC shop but everything has to be shipped in, the shop in Mooresville, NC is ten minutes form virtually every piece it takes to build a car. We recently moved our shop to Crossville, TN; our manufacturing facility was in Florida, our training facility was in North Carolina. A number of determining factors influenced our move. Tennessee is a pro-manufacturing state, no sales tax on new shop equipment, raw materials, any part of materials that become a finished product, no taxes, on packaging materials, labels, boxes, etc… Tennessee also has no property tax on goods in progress, finished goods inventory, inventory of merchandise for sale. Equipment purchased before 2000 has no tax value. One top NEXTEL team stated that in 2006 they paid close to a million dollars in sales tax in NC for the parts and products used. Another attractive issue in Tennessee is physical location; our shop is located within an 8 hours drive of 70% of the U.S. population. Tennessee also has a strong government financial income base so government fines, permits, licenses, inspections are all very minimal. One of our west coast customers moved their entire refinishing center out of California to Nevada because of the red tape associated with painting. Our associates tell horror stories of local and state laws dealing with everything from building codes, environmental issues and fire codes. If your business relies on exposure at trade car shows, motorcycle shows and or competitions then travel expenses play into overall costs. A Florida parts manufacturer located in Stewart, FL told me that a series of mid-western, mid-Atlantic shows cost over $100,000 in travel expenses, flights, motels, rental cars, not to mention the show cost and lost time in the shop. Every one of those shows were less than eight hours driving time of our location in Tennessee.

In 2005 at a trade show workshop one business owner said, “I can’t compete with a guy in his backyard.” The hot rod industry has many backyard builder one-off projects that are in most cases hobby builds. Most backyard guys have no overhead, minimal shop space, very little equipment and do not even attempt to compete in the open market. In Athens, TN one quote “Backyard Builder” has a 5,000 sq. foot shop, two full time employees, works 50 to 70 hours weekly, has $100,000 worth of equipment, and builds 20 cars a year. Its not the backyard builders that you have to compete with but the efficient business owner that surrounds himself with quality personnel, state-of-the-art equipment, has a distribution network that works, with the least amount of overhead and associated governmental baggage. You are allowed to make a profit and that profit sometimes comes from the expense side, other times it comes from the being more productive. One west fabricator that specialized in custom motorcycle tanks was building the tanks using the bag and mallet, and English Wheel method. Each tank was taking about 40 hours to make at $50 per hour. After attending a metal shaping class, he purchased a double-headed power hammer. His staff can now turn out two tanks in the same 40 hours period. He paid the hammer off in six weeks and now makes a comfortable profit being more productive.

In the past number of years, we have seen a definite trend based on the strength of the custom vehicle industry. Auto body shops throughout the US are starting to entertain options other than conventional insurance/collision repairs. The insurance industry has kept a tight rain on body shops holding and in many areas dictating shop rates, repair times, even percentages of mark-up on materials or parts. One State Farm report stated that the East cost average on shop rate was just over $45 per hour with some shops as low as $32 per hour. Growing up in a body shop I loved to build special projects, restorations, custom cars, but my Dad always was shy about building them, stating that the value of the car was less that the cost of repair. It still takes the same amount of time to restore a car now as it did in 1980 but the value of the car supports the cost. Shop owners have made their investment in facilities, equipment and tools. The switch to a performance-based shop in most occasions can be seamless and relatively painless. The major issue with the transition is surrounding themselves with efficient, skilled technicians. Restoration shops can utilize most seasoned technicians requiring simple fabrication skills, while shops building ground up custom designs require a very different skill set. Performance fabricators require a multitude of skills from many different associated industries. Most of the current workforce is a generation of fabricators that have lived through an evolution of concept vehicles’, most born between 1935 and 1965 have learned a combination of skill utilizing the cut and try methodology. Over the years, facilities have offered short term training that would take experienced workers and expand their skills. Although the US Department of Labor doesn’t recognize the hot rod industry as a stand-alone industry incumbent worker grant programs will allow existing businesses to shift gears, so to speak, in the form of workforce training. In the past ten years, the Departments of Labor, state and federal, have placed value on strengthening existing businesses by training workers already employed. Body shop and mechanical shops wishing to expand into performance fabrication can contact local workforce development agencies for these incumbent workers programs. As in many instances, training institutions address the needs of industries that have the biggest needs. Skills training programs focus on one particular area of instruction. A proficient hot rod fabricator has MIG/TIG welding knowledge, metal shaping and component development skills. When available most training facilities offer individual programs taking years to complete.

Finding a multi-skilled experienced fabricator is a task. We see many shops searching out fabricators from the racing arena. Race team technicians usually last in the fast-paced industry about five to ten years and welcome the opportunity to work in a less restricted environment.

Americans love for the performance automobile has kept United States ahead of its international counter parts in production of the hot rod, muscle car, custom car market! Even with some companies mass-producing parts over seas, the American attitude and American imagination still reigns supreme in the area of custom cars.

Daily we have at least one hot rod, muscle car, performance car enthusiasts declare that they too are going to jump on the bandwagon and quote “open a hot rod shop.” All it takes if a shop, some equipment, a little imagination, some cars to build and off to the land of the independently wealthy. On more than one occasion, the discussion starts with, “I was watching Barrett-Jackson and …” The truth of the matter is the industry is growing rapidly, but it is time for the hot rod/performance industry to demand some respect. From the first Model “A” that rolled off the assembly line the automotive industry has controlled the interest of the legislative entities of the government. In the background builders started to modify production parts, hot rodding, customizing, racing and refinishing within days of rolling off the assembly line. For over a hundred years, the automotive industry and the hot rod industry have traveled parallel to each other. Both sharing technology from one another on many occasions when the automotive needed new concept, or performance tips it looked to the hot rod, motorsports, performance industry for answers. After WWII, many automotive executives started to realize that the custom car and niche car builders could possibly challenge the baseline production cars so the major players of the day quickly adapted concept performance programs in-house. They hired the best fabricators, racers, designers, inventors, artists, industrialist and created positions known as Design Engineers. Smokey Yunick’s biography refers to General Motors executives calling racing and hot rodding rogue industries.

In the last fifty years, the custom vehicle market place has grown but truthfully, we do not know how large it is. It is easy to see the popularity of the custom vehicle, racing alone is larger than ever before. There are more hot rod shows, motorcycle shows, not excluding the restoration purist. If you go onto the US Department of Labor website, you will find no industry listings for racing, hot rodding, performance industry or custom vehicles. NAISC, a coding system that lists industries by skills, does not refer to any of these either. In fact, to be a proficient hot rod builder you would borrow skills from over twenty NAISC listed trades. If you contact the Economic Development Agency in your state and asked what the impact of the hot rod, motorsports, performance industry has on your state’s economy most will not even acknowledge that it exists. Most states just throw the industry in with tourism. In a recent Department of Labor job search, not one listing for hot rod related jobs existed simply because there is no category, if no category, no industry, if no industry, no jobs, if no jobs, no need for training and so it goes.

Now if we could get the government to concede that because the industry does not exist we should not have to pay taxes - that would be cool!

Many years ago in the early sixties my Dad embarked on one of his many adventures, a teenage nightclub. The thought was to give young people a place that was drug free, alcohol free with good adult supervision.  A place where teens could hangout and listen to music in a friendly environment.  My Dad soon found out that the reason young people “hangout” is because they have no money to do other things.  One observation that Dad made from this was that kids liked feeding quarters into a jukebox along with ever ringing pinball machines.  My Dad then surmised that if entertainers of the day would film their performances, put them on a TV type jukebox machine these kids would watch them for hours.  One down, another million good ideas to go.

When we started to get into racing, car building came natural.  Nothing about the car building process seemed to intimidate my Dad at all, and because of his confidence, his engineering background, along with his “If they can do it, I should be able to do it” attitude, it magnified my confidence level in fabrication to where I am today.  One of the issues in our racing program was the engine.  NASCAR and most Outlaw tracks in our area of the country where limited to 440 cubic inches with a 9.6 pound per cubic inch weight limit.  Most everybody went as big as possible when it came to motors.  Smokey Yunick, at this time, came out in Hot Rod Magazine with a series of articles about Mouse Motors or Chevrolet’s small blocks.  In short, Smokey felt in time that engine builders could get as much as 2 horsepower per cubic inch.  Smokey had taken the 350 cubic inch LT1 motor right out of the curate and made over 400 horsepower on his dyno in Florida. Chevy advertised these engines in Corvettes, Novas, Camaros and some C-10 trucks.  In Smokey’s article, he also stated that the big block 427 with the L88 option was making only about 425 horsepower on a good day and could only be twisted to a whopping 5800 RPM.  Smokey felt the LT1 could easily turn 7000 RPM with no adverse wear on any parts.  In a later article, Smokey suggested a 302 aluminum high rise, a factory part for Z28; a 750 CRM Holley and a L88 NoduLar iron flywheel would carry the stock motor to over 450 horsepower.

After studying a number of articles, researching some information Chevrolet had out, my Dad decided to buy the crate LT1 option motor for our racing engine.  Many in the area felt that the engine would have too tight of clearances to perform, but we put the criticism to side and stayed our course.  We raced two complete seasons, 9 million practice laps, the car set outside all winter and about ten races into the third season broke a wrist pin.  We tore the engine down, the bearings looked great, you could have taken and honed the cylinders out and reassembled it.  The crate motor built for streetcars passed the test on the short tracks of North Florida with flying colors.  When I moved to North Carolina in the end of 1984 I soon found out that a lot of short trackers used the LT1 as the engine of choice.  Back then you could by the engine with everything but a carburetor and distributor for around $1,000.00.  Even if you took it home, disassembled it, clearenced it, changed the cam, done a three angled valve job, you still couldn’t beat the price.

We all want the same thing, but not all men are created equal!

The concept is great; give everybody the same car, same motor, same drive train, the same rules, tires, bodies and the list goes on.  The driver and luck takes it from there.  I have been racing for 35 years and motors have always been an issue.  90% of the time a competitor gets on a winning streak, everybody thinks he is running an illegal motor, or has found something trick.  Body hangers could work for weeks in the wind tunnel hunting and tweaking for that perfect combination of balance, but when Sunday comes ole DW says “Boy the car is handling great on the straight-aways.” It’s all a game of numbers, you take the same car and driver, if the car is tight, the driver will bitch hands down on power, it is loose he claims he’s got so much motor he cant hook it up.  Two turns up on the track bar or down and the engine mysteriously looses or gains horsepower. 

As a fabricator, I got to spend more than my far share of time in the motor room building trick pieces.  Remember, when I came into Winston Cup racing if you were making 600 horsepower out of 358 cubic inches you were doing something.  In the mid-eighties we started working hard on oiling systems, moved the oil tanks to the front, built better oil pans, scrapers, pick-ups, added scavenge stages to oil pumps and in less than a year picked up 50 to 75 horsepower. You had engine builders that had the mind set to go for all the power available, set on the most polls, lead the most laps, and let the car finish where it may.  Others took the conservative roll, tune the engines safely, turn less RPM’s rotating assemblies, taking no chances.  Even into the early nineties, you could have 50 less horsepower with a good driver and still win championships, but that was changing quickly.

In 1981, NASCAR took the Saturday night Late Model Sportsman and made a touring series.  NASCAR started to implement a plan that would start the Late Model Stock car division as part of the plan a common car, engine, along with a 350 CFM two-barrel carburetor.  This was a determining factor in the concept of crate engines.  We quickly found that what we thought we knew about engines we didn’t.  Harold Elliot, Rusty Wallace’s championship engine builder, preached religiously that a racing engine is nothing but a glorified air pump.  The LMSC 350 cubic inch engine rules included stock exhaust, 350 CFM 2300 Holley Carb, 64 CC Chambers, and stock stroke.  Engine builders worked hard but the LMSC motors made, at the most, 360 horsepower.  It didn’t make a difference on cams, head flow, rod length, light rotating assemblies, it would only breath so much.  Engine builders would flow multiples of carburetors hunting one that would flow just a ½ % more.  I had a good carburetor that flowed 89% of 400 CFM about 356 CFM, on our best engine this carburetor would make about 370 horsepower, but that engine cost about $15,000.00 to build.  It wasn’t about the cost of parts the expense was the trial and error method of developing the perfect engine.

As early as the mid-nineties NASCAR was hearing car owners start to voice their concerns about engine prices.  Top teams found out that fresh engines made more power; it was not uncommon for a LMSC to leak 10% on a leak down after just 200 laps of competition or 30 horsepower.  A Cup car could easily loose 80 hp in a 500 mile race.  Take 30 to 40 horsepower away from a 360 horsepower engine and you’re in trouble.  At first a freshen-up was about $750.00, heads were removed, touch-up on valve job and back together they went.  In the later years a thousand lap freshen-up was $2,500.00 which included rockers, springs, retainers, a valve job, inspect lower end and dyno.  Some considered overkill for an engine that only turned 7200 RPM at the max.

In comes the crate motor.

As tracks across the country started to see car counts start to fall, many jumped at the opportunity to add crate motor rules in the Super Stock, Modified, and Limited Late Model divisions.  Many tracks made advertising partnerships with GM Dealers to provide the circle track engines straight from that dealer.  Entry-level racers loved the concept, a $3,000.00 engine ready to run.  Engine builders screamed like panthers, team owners had mixed emotions, I had two LMSC engines, if crate motors replaced them, what was I going to do with the motors along with all the distributors, carburetors, spare parts, etc…  One limited car owner I built cars for would run a crate motor for 3 to 4 weeks until it started to leak down, he would then sell it to one of the local hot rod shops for $2,500.00 and back to the track with a new power plant.  Engine builders reached a reality check; many looked for alternative avenues for revenue.  Many started to build their own versions of crater motors policing heavily each sanctioning body hoping for approval with exclusive contracts.

I talked to a lot of engine builders, many felt that the tracks betrayed them, singled them out.  Some felt NASCAR and GM shot them in the head.  Many aftermarket suppliers told NASCAR they would pull sponsorship and contingencies if these engines were made mandatory.  This year after the PRI Show I had a number of calls form car owners saying that the buzz of the show was crate motors, GM, Ford, Mopar, Jegs, Summit, Speedway, Jasper, Edelbrock, Childers and Wegner all had some form of crate motors.  The rumor Wegner was pitching about racing crate motors has been rampant for years; it materialized with a contract with NASCAR.  Aftermarket suppliers seem to be satisfied because the Wegner engine utilized their parts. Holley, MSD, Edelbrock, Crane, Mahle, Quarter Master all have an opportunity to participate.

Racers will in time have to warm up to the concept of crate motors while hot hodders have fell in love with the idea that they could get 400 hp 400 ft. lbs of torque and a 12,000 mile, one year guarantee.  For less than $5,000.00 street guys can put dependable performance under that right foot and head out to shows knowing that today’s crate motors aren’t going to leave you aside the road.  Be able to pick and save when choosing an engine for your street rod lightens the load.  I have had friends that collected parts for years just to get an engine for a street machine.  Some took a shot at buying a junkyard motor dressing it out in chrome and held their breath all the way to the car show!  As we started to put together parts for our first engine, I put an intake, valve covers, oil pan, cam, lifters and a number of other critical parts under my bed.  My Mom hit the roof one day while cleaning.  “You can’t keep oily car parts under you bed!” she hollered.  I told her that they were all new, no oil, just pure horsepower placed there to keep the competition from knowing what we had for them.  A Mexican standoff, but it was going to stay close to me until it went in the car.  It came down to a sniff and a threat that she had better not smell anything that resembled oil in my room.  The good thing was I had a little brother that omitted enough odors on his own to hide the good stuff.

In the mid nineties, when we saw the NASCAR Sportsman series start to unwind, as car owners we wondered what our options and what could be done to fill the gap between the Saturday night LMSC and the Busch Grand national Series. As a car builder that had a car in every NASCAR Sportsman event, I was deeply concerned that the concept was going to disappear.  Then the phone call from Randy Myers pitching the idea that USAR owned by Hooters President Bob Brooks was interested in taking the Sportsman concept to the next level.  Bob sponsored Alan Kulwicki in the championship run the year before Alan, Dan Duncan, Mark Brooks and Charlie Campbell were tragically killed on the way to Bristol, TN.  Alan had a great interest in training the racing workforce and at the time, Metalcraft Tools had started to train that workforce.  Many of our students worked for Alan, it was a starting point for entry-level technicians.  After Alan and associates died, Bob’s grief for his son and dear friends along with some issues with NASCAR left him looking for a legacy.  Alan made an impact on Bob; his vision of how a championship team should be ran was instilled in the elder Brooks mind.  I had an opportunity to do business with Alan, his focus was unbelievable, he had a reputation for detail.  Some employees even felt that Alan looked over their shoulders, Felix Sabates, executor of Alan’s estate said that after looking at the team’s books he had to take his hat off to the most efficient ran race team in NASCAR history, a true championship effort on the track and off.  Alan made the statement “If you give them (meaning the team) 10 days to fix it, it will take 10 days, give them 2 days, and they get it done. They’re racers, that’s what racers do!”  Needless to say, Alan rotated help pretty freely, he had cots in the shop, a shower and lockers with daily deliveries from the pizza place.  Alan had a plan; he executed it to a championship.

Later at a function announcing the formation of Brooks Institute in 1994 Bob Brooks alluded to Alan’s interest in introducing motorsports to young people and how critical it was to create a path that would allow there young racers to join the industry at productive levels.  As a car owner in the USAR ProCup series, I have had the opportunity to hear Bob Brooks explain his vision of what he thought the series should be.  Of course a tool to promote the Hooters restaurant chain, along with Naturally Fresh Foods, but also an opportunity for advancement for drivers wanting to get into Cup.  In one of the last Bob Brooks speeches I heard, he said something that I thought finally got the point across; the ProCup series was instrumental in preparing many individuals for professional motorsports, drivers, mechanics, officials, public relation, even marketing people.  Although the price was great, Alan Kulwicki, Mark Brooks, Dan Duncan and Charlie Campbell did not die in vain, but opened the future for many young people.

On many occasions, I have set down with the ProCup officials over the years to discuss the future.  When the series started, it was about used Busch Grand National and Winston Cup cars.  In 2000 the series started to build momentum.  NASCAR teams started to understand the value of ProCup as a training ground for young drivers; they could literally take a car out of their fleet, drop in an engine with steel heads and 600 Holley to go racing.  Hendricks, Roush, Woods Brothers, all jumped at the opportunity.  In 2001 Fritz Augustine announced the plan to have a series nose and tail.  I quickly protested, car owners were starting to align themselves with NASCAR owners to provide a training service, but this change would discouraged NASCAR team owners.  In a meeting with Fritz, he said that if it were up to him the cars would be fiberglass late model cars.  Mr. Brooks wanted a metal body NASCAR look-a-like.  Fritz said he was going to make changes until it was all fiberglass.  I told Fritz that the teams were looking for experienced technicians not only drivers, but also body hangers, fabricators, assemblers, etc…  Fritz and the Cox’s both took the stance that the ProCup series was a stand-alone series, they did not want racers to come get experience and leave, though they knew it would happen.  ProCup would become a haven for racers to old for the big time, a series for racers that will stay.  On the other side, the wing commander was preaching that the series was a stepping-stone to the big show.

This year Mr. Brooks passed away and I am sure that the vision he shared with Alan Kulwicki has also passed.  Just weeks after his death Fritz announced that 5 Star, a body fabricator would provide bodies exclusive to ProCup for 2007.  The combo would include a composite main body with aluminum doors - basically a late model body.  While running Busch Grand National in the late 80’s NASCAR announced that the Competition Director, Robert Black would be replaced, I asked Joe Collins why?  Joe explained that even though Robert Black did a great job the series had passed his imagination, and without the right amount of imagination, you can’t see the big picture.  Mr. Brooks, I don’t know if you realized the impact you would make on the motorsports industry, I don’t even know if you were able to convince the people that surrounded you how important this legacy was.  The one thing I do know is that the Hooter’s ProCup series passed the imagination of its leaders about three years ago.  It’s still my choice for young drivers, but I am afraid the vision is growing dimmer and dimmer.

As I have stated in other articles, racing is an evolution. NASCAR has, for years, hunted the perfect lead-in series for the Busch Series, and Cup. In the 70’s somebody had the idea of starting the Daytona Dash Series, basically an American Mini Sedan Series with Vegas, Pintos and that sort. The concept was appealing to the manufactures, but as many times in the history of NASCAR great ideas lack-luster execution. All Pro, Busch North, Winston West, Daytona Dash and even the Sportsman

Series all suffered the same fate; no TV, poor purses, it was like they wanted it, but they didn’t. For years young drivers have asked me what is the path of success, what do I do to prepare for Cup? It all happens in stages. Sonny Hawkins, a car builder/racer once explained that young racers should first learn to drive, second learn to race and third learn to win

Now my two cents: Start as young as you can, go-karts, ATV’s, motorcycles, BMX Bikes, anything to build confidence. All forms of competition can help, just understanding their surroundings is critical. How to pass, run close to other competitors, vehicle control, go-karts seem to be the first choice of many. There are a lot of tracks, equipment is available, is relatively inexpensive and is less intimidating than motorcycles. Most prefer to start on dirt, but it’s best not to dwell there. Go-karts on dirt, contrary to popular belief, don’t teach kid’s to drive loose cars. Dirt does help with confidence and is extremely forgiving; throttle control along with the art of driving a tight or pushing kart is all that comes from dirt. Once the driver gets his confidence and starts to run consistently upfront, get them on asphalt. The intensity level on asphalt is 10 times, speed, car control, handling, basic engineering, tire technology, engine tuning, etc… I once had a student that had multiple dirt championships and over 100 feature wins on dirt. His crew chief himself and team were sharp, well funded, best of equipment, their team had evolved to the engine tuning, tire management, even building libraries of information at each track throughout the east coast. When I suggested that asphalt was more intense, they all were insulted. “I can drive a loose car better than anybody.” I quickly stated that you can manhandle a tight kart; I challenged him to bring his best game and spank those boys at the asphalt track. Monday morning they walked into class like somebody stole their dog. The driver said, “We were out to lunch. Those boys forgot more than we know. We are going to have to step up our game to win on asphalt; I thought there was nothing left for me as a driver on karts! I was wrong.” In less than 10 weeks, they won their first race on the black top. It took new spindles for the kart, their championship dirt motors wouldn’t even keep up, their tire game became critical, the driver actually learned the difference between tight and loose. “I wasted 100 feature wins on dirt; if I had it to do over I would have made the change the minute we won races consistently” added the driver. People like to win, drivers like to dominate, team owners like the exposure, but you have a short time to get there. Once you learn to win at any level it’s time to challenge the senses again. Mini stocks on dirt are the same. Asphalt cars teach different traits, horsepower to tire contact, patch ratios, establish the progression. Legend cars, USAC Focus cars, Midgets, all teach drivers to manage traction and handling characteristics with high horsepower to tire ratios. Stock cars all have different combinations of horsepower, tires, aero packages and components. In the early days you would here the hot drivers come from ASA series, the truth was that the talent was entering into the series because of their backgrounds. Rusty Wallace, Mark Martin, Johnny Benson, Alan Kulwicki all ran Saturday night shows with late model cars in the mid west. The next step was a familiar touring series. In the South the Late Model Sportsman series regulars also ran Saturday night shows; Harry Gant, Dale Earnhardt, Morgan Shepherd, Tommy Ellis, Dale Jarrett, Darrell Waltrip.

In 1982 the NASCAR Busch Series started, this series would be the primary feeder series for Cup. Characteristics of the two series almost set the value of the talent. The Late Model Sportsman cars were basically clones of the Cup cars, big spring, truck arm, 3200 lb., steel bodied, Detroit Locker, 10 inch tired racecars give drivers direct and relative experience. The ASA driers were driving similar cars but the evolution of that series took the cars away from the Cup mold. Cars had fiberglass bodies, high down force, exotic chassis, 11-inch soft tires with spool differentials. Although the ASA drivers had experience and all were winners, the transition took longer because of the car they evolved from. In the end of 1984 I got the opportunity to work for Osterland Racing which sold out to Blue Max Racing, the team that Tim Richmond drove for from 1983 to 1985. Many of the team members felt that Richmond was a great driver but his inexperience explained 11 totaled cars stacked out back of the shop. Everybody felt that Richmond was going somewhere else at the end of 1985. Even though I joined another team, many of my friends that still worked for Blue Max said that they were debating hiring Rusty Wallace, that had been recently released form Cliff Stewart’s team. Word from in the team was the debate was over Rusty’s background, many felt that Rusty might end up being another Tim Richmond - tearing up cars fro a couple of years then jumping to another team. Team leader at the time, Harold Elliott set down with the team and basically decided to teach Rusty what he needed to know. Harold, Barry Dodson, Jimmy Makar and many other top profiled team members put a plan in motion. They headed to Atlanta to the last race of the year with tow trailers full of cars and parts. The plan was to shorten the learning process for driver along with the team. Harold explained later to me that they made a series of runs making changes every time making sure the change related in Rusty’s mind. Different gears, carburetors, tires, set-ups, exhaust systems, engine timing; the team put it all out there and like a sponge Rusty absorbed it all. The team won its first race in April of 198.6

The moral of the story is; you have to be willing to change to the environment that you plan to survive in. There is an explanation for the success of every driver, some just have God given talents, some have to learn that they have the talent; some even have to mature into it. Some racers even make the resolution that if they cannot make it to Cup the will stay were they are the most successful. In today’s motorsports industry, time and money are critical in the path of success. As a driver starts to mature it is critical that they reach their levels of success and move on. NASCAR Late Model Stockcars that took the place of the Late Model Sportsman cars that became Busch Cars have provided a learning ground for many Busch and Cup drivers. Dale Jr., Jeff and Ward Burton, Dennis Setzer, Elliot Sadler, Mike Skinner, Denny Hamlin, Danny O’Quinn, Jeff Green, Scott Riggs, Brain Vickers all came from the LMSC ranks. These cars mirror the Busch and Cup cars, the mechanics are the same. NASCAR started the Sportsman series with the purpose of giving experience on the 1 ½ mile tracks to the LMSC drivers. This also opened the door from many other drivers; Todd Bodine, Jack Sprague, Rob Huffman, Chad Chaffin all got experience from the Sportsman series. When NASCAR abandoned the Sportsman concept USAR stepped up with the Hooters ProCup series. This gave competitors, that couldn’t afford the Busch series, a car that would be a stepping-stone to the next level. Jon Wood, Ricky Hendricks, Brian Vickers, Regan Smith, Shane Huffman, Danny O’Quinn, Kertus Davis, Mark McFarland, Clay Rogers all ran the USAR series. Today many NASCAR teams use Hooters as a developmental proving ground for other series, Joe Gibbs, Tony Stewart, Dale Jr. have all put cars in the mix. Woody Howard, Shelby Howard, Shane Wallace, Joey Legano, Matt Carter, Ken Butler III, Brett Butler, Gabe DiCarlo , Cameron Dodson all have ties to Cup, Busch or Craftsman Truck teams. My choice in the evolution for your drivers is a stop along the way in ProCup. The 250 lap races are 1-day shows following closely the rules and format of the three premium NASCAR touring events. Each event has a mandatory pit stop, an inspection process that includes pre-race and post-race tear-downs, two lap qualifying, the cars are similar in down force, weight the same, run big springs, truck arms, similar shock configurations, radical tires, all the things that give drivers premium exposure. ProCup also will let drivers race at young ages, some at 14 years. It’s got my nod!!

If your son is the next Joe Earnhardt you need to put a plan in motion, be prepared to make your investment and it is an investment, if you follow the path. Don’t loose site of the end-result, if you get a chance to take a short cut to the next level take it. Remember most kids fall through the crack when parents look back at the stuff they own instead of the stuff they have to buy to move on. The more levels you create the more you will spend in time and money. Investment, investment, investment!!! Clyde Vickers once told the press that he spent millions getting Brian to the point of being hired by Ricky Hendricks but with one signature, Brian balanced out the account.

“I know that you really like Danny O’Quinn, do you think that Danny has been treated fair in the Roush Deal?”
T.P. Wake Forest, NC

I am a big fan of Danny O’Quinn.  As a team owner and car builder, I got to race Danny and his family’s team on many occasions.  I love real racers.  It’s always amazed me when somebody was quick to discount a fellow racer because he lived away from the main stream.  Many times Danny was discounted at his home track but this kid was a winning machine.  I loved to watch him race and when he got the nod to join the Gong Show I crossed my fingers and hoped for the best.  Car owners are creatures of habit and Jack Roush is no different.  If you look at the mold that Jack uses Danny isn’t a perfect match.  If you look at the drivers that a car owner chooses their physical build is similar, personalities are alike.  Backgrounds are similar.  Jack likes mid-west guys, Mark Martin, Jamie McMurry, Matt Kenseth, Todd Kluever, Erik Darnell.  The shortest driver is Martin at 5′ 6″.  David Ragan, Darnell and ex-drivers Busch and Benson all are 6′ tall.  Kenseth, Biffle, McMurry, East and ex-driver Burton all are 5′ 9″.  Carl Edwards is 6′ 1″.  All of the drivers weigh between 150 lbs. and 175 lbs.  Danny is 6′ 5″, weighs 240 lbs., and is from the mountains of Virginia.  Enough profiling.

Insiders in Roush reported that the Gong Show is 2004 came down to Darnell, Kluever and Danny.  Kluever was Jack’s choice from the start, Danny and Darnell were both told to work on getting speedway experience, and Roush Racing helped both on the ARCA circuit.  Everybody in the Gong Show process liked Danny, some said he didn’t need anything on the track, but what he lacked was communication skills and camera presence, he needed to be more polished for the media.  Danny went to work, his family and friends hooked him up, he worked on TV doing interviews, getting ready for the Driver-X search.  One of the drivers in the search said every time somebody raises the bar Danny O’Quinn tops it.  Websites, blogs and even Discovery Channel insiders leaked that Danny was the man, drivers off the show indicated that Danny out performed everybody but they all had exclusive agreements not to talk about it: reality TV just imagine.

When it came down to the end, Eric Darnell won Driver-X and was the announced driver of the 99 truck.  Todd Kluever, Roush Racing indicated, would be Heir Apparent to Mark Martin and would run the 3M car for the Rookie of the Year in the Busch Series. Shortly after Roush announced that Danny O’Quinn would also run for Rookie of the Year in Busch.  The press asked the question, “Who actually won?”  To many onlookers Danny’s deal looked better than Darnell’s.  A friend of mine inside Roush’s deal added that Bobby Hudson, Doug Richert, Mike Beam, all saw something in Danny that made them think he was worth the investment.  However, as in any organization not everything is equal.  Early projections felt Kluever like Edwards would dominate and be hands downs choice for Rookie of the Year in Busch.  NASCAR later announced that John Andretti would be eligible for Rookie of the Year in Busch, 367 Cup starts, 4 Indy 500’s and he’s a Rookie. Jr. Motorsports and Kevin Harvick also entered rookies.  Roush put Danny with a rookie crew chief, a rookie crew and into battle they went.  Now a week before Homestead Danny is tide with Andretti for Rookie of the Year.  Kluever fell short of the mark, McFarland was replaced, Lamar wasn’t fast enough for Harvick and Danny and team quietly matured until they caught Andretti.

The first time I met Danny O’Quinn I liked what I saw, a winning personality, and a great sense of humor, a racer through and through.  He knew what it took to prepare a car, every bolt, every nut, on the track he never gave up.  Although very young he could work traffic, miss wrecks, conserve his equipment; he’s a winner and his resume shows it.  The look in the eye, that devilish grin, the way he handles himself, the way he searches for the right words when talking to the press, an unpolished stone that turns into a diamond when you put up the window net.  Many, like myself see Danny looking into a mirror with the reflection of Dale Earnhardt Sr. looking back.

Jack Roush has made investments in many careers; Roush must have felt that Danny deserved a chance.  I know that if you ask Danny he will tell you that anything is better than installing trailer hitches.  Danny might have been strong with a stronger team and I understand the pressure that the Roush organization has to perform, 3M expected to see Todd Kluever win races and the Rookie of the Year title.  Sometimes its about making a choice, and in today’s NASCAR a number of the sports best drivers and crew chiefs from the past would not make it.  Sponsors look for a polished representative; it’s not so much about performance on the track but what can be sold.  Years ago, Banjo Matthews told us that he tried to get Junior Johnson to hire Dale Earnhardt.  Junior felt that even if Dale matured into a good driver he would be hard to sell, later that year he told Richard Childress that Dale might be a good choice for his team.  A mistake Junior regretted until he quit racing.  Danny O’Quinn indicated that he might not have a job next year because of sponsorship issues.  I guess I am prejudice in favor of Danny O’Quinn but I feel that if Roush Racing releases Danny Jack might later wish that he didn’t.  Jack’s a racer, that’s why Danny is still there and I have to say “Thanks Jack” for giving this kid a chance.  I wish all of them could get the same opportunity.