CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 23, 2014, 11:27:19 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
104713 Posts in 12247 Topics by 4719 Members
Latest Member: Baconcks
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Model Specific Discussions
| |-+  Trans-Am Camaros
| | |-+  General talk about Trans-Am cars, parts, whatever...
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6  All Print
Author Topic: General talk about Trans-Am cars, parts, whatever...  (Read 14334 times)
cuda48
Member
***
Posts: 73



View Profile Email
« Reply #15 on: March 14, 2012, 05:39:33 PM »

Well I'll tel you most of what I know.  The 71' Championship car (Donohue-Collins-Jocko) has been restored to Donohue era and was supposedly sold at Russo last year but I'm not sure of the sale.  That  car is no longer listed on the Historic Trans Am website roster.  We've seen it run, just look though the old event photos.  Both of the Roy Woods Cars still exist, Epsman and Sorenson owned, listed on the same website and still raced.  Those 2 cars were originally the Penske 1970 Javelins with updated sheet metal.  There was a third 70' Javelin (Donohue called it the s**tbox / mulecar) and it was donated by Donohue to the University of Pittsburgh at the end of the 70' season.  I believe this is the car Brooke Mosgrove restored and is now owned by Bruce Canepa.  David Feece owned a 68' Javelin and I believe that car now resides in Canada?  There is a 68' Javelin in Texas...I don't know which one, and then there is the Javelin owned by Craig Jackson that has a 1970 front end on a 69' car...I don't know what that's all about.  Buzz Dyer still has his 1970 Javelin, a beautiful restoration I might add, but the Historic Trans Am group wants him to repaint it to a different scheme than when HE raced it so you'll only see him at different vintage events because he won't. I haven't seen Ted Robert's Fyr Fyter Javelin (a RK 68) in some time.  I'd say most of them still exist but a bunch of them were re-skinned and updated.
Camicia
Logged
klvn8r
Member
***
Posts: 96


View Profile Email
« Reply #16 on: March 14, 2012, 08:14:02 PM »

Good eye, Cuda.....with a small correction.  The 68 Revson car, is, I believe, in Canada now.  It sold at Russo and Steele a year or so back.  The 68 Follmer RKE team car is indeed in the Dallas TX area.  I have easy access to that one.  Dead on about the 69 Craig Jackson car.....can't figure that one out.  Why isn't it RIGHT???  Buzz still has his car, that he bought in 71; it IS the Fyr-Fyter car from 1970.  Ted Roberts was driving the 68 Follmer car, in 69, as #55, and got the "new" car for 1970.

klvn8r
Logged
kiwiboss
Member
***
Posts: 22



View Profile Email
« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2012, 02:04:07 AM »

You guys are onto it, unbelievably by chance i spoke with Buzz Dyer at the Somona Historics last year, didn't realize he had owned his Javelin for so long, good on him!! said they won't let him race it in HTA because its dry sump, didn't mention anything about paint? offcourse hes good mates with Ron Grable that raced Bruce302's Pontiac in New Zealand back in the 70's!!

Dale Mathers(NZL)
Logged
cuda48
Member
***
Posts: 73



View Profile Email
« Reply #18 on: March 15, 2012, 08:30:04 AM »

Hi Dale,
But  Canepa's 70' Penske Javelin has a dry sump.  Hmmm...  I thought you could run the correct equipment through 72' to be included in the Historic Trans Am Group?
The Wood's Javs are both dry sump. Donohue's 71 too.

klvn8r thanks for the clear up info.  I'm mostly the Mopar expert but I have soaked up most things Trans Am !

Camicia
« Last Edit: March 15, 2012, 09:02:38 AM by Jon Mello » Logged
Jon Mello
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2012, 09:09:55 AM »

The Historic Trans-Am group does not generally allow dry sumps but there are exceptions for the AMC engines and possibly the Pontiacs (not sure on that one). My understanding is that's because the AMC parts are much harder to find and the wet sump system does not adequately do the job (aka, the engines will not live with all the braking and cornering forces going on without a dry sump). I don't think Buzz's car is not being allowed to run due to it having a dry sump because other AMC cars in that group have it. The issues are between the heads of the group and Buzz himself so lets not take this conversation into the politics behind the scenes. I don't want to see Buzz or HTA bashed here. I don't know that that's going to happen but I'm just saying let's not go there.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 01:21:56 PM by Jon Mello » Logged

Jon Mello
CRG
crazyamc
Member
***
Posts: 26


View Profile Email
« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2012, 11:04:22 AM »

Hello,  I've been REALLY enjoying all the stories and pics without joining until now.   This is my favorite site!!  I joined today because for some reason I couldn't see the pics of my own car that KLVN8R posted for me.....         Since this is " General T/A discussion"  I'd like to throw out this fact to ponder concerning AMC longevity..  in '68, when the rules were much tighter concerning 'aftermarket parts',  Ronnie Kaplan's Javelins' finished EVERY race, including a debut at the 12 hours of Sebring, the first year anybody raced an AMC..   Sure horsepower and cornering g's weren't as strong as later, but they were more than competitive, with wetsumps...  Dry sumps became legal for all in '71, but my opinion would be they're not "required" ..     My next vintage car will be a wetsump 'sharpstick'  Roll Eyes
Logged
Jon Mello
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2012, 02:15:09 PM »

Welcome. You bring up a good point about the Javelin engines surviving just fine with wet sumps earlier but then again the '70 Penske team had a lot of oil problems before they went to dry sumps in '71. All in the name of "safety" according to Roger.
Logged

Jon Mello
CRG
cuda48
Member
***
Posts: 73



View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: March 18, 2012, 01:11:05 PM »

Crazyamc...I agree that in the early years of Trans Am the wet sumps seemed to work just fine.  What led to the problems in 1970 was tire technology had improved to the point that the cars had some grip rather than sliding around (just look at the photos of the earlier years) and everyone tried to lower the engines in the chassis for a lower center of gravity.  That meant oil pans that were not as deep as before and little room to go wider in the chassis.  Even Mark Donohue admitted in his book that if they had simply raised the engines back up (as Penske had suggested) they would have probably been more successful but Donohue just couldn't realize the benefit at the expense of raising the center of gravity.  The Pontiacs simply had a crankshaft that was too large in diameter and the crankshaft speed/surface area killed them.  Dry sumps fixed all that.

Camicia
Logged
Jon Mello
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: May 29, 2012, 09:44:38 AM »

If you guys get the chance, check out the new issue of Musclecar Review magazine. I believe it is the June 2012 issue. Tim Lopata, Warren Dernoshek and I helped out Drew Hardin on an article which covers the '67 Yenko Stormer Z-28 road racers. It's a good read and has some neat photos as well.
Logged

Jon Mello
CRG
MO
Member
***
Posts: 301


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: June 02, 2012, 10:56:10 PM »

Jon, great article and information. That's the first I've seen on the Stormer's, and I wondered how many there were and if any survived. I've seen pictures of the Penske car with the SS hood before, do you know why they used it (maybe the same reason as Boye's car)? You'd think they too would have removed the grilles to save weight.
Logged
Jon Mello
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: June 03, 2012, 05:30:19 PM »

Thanks for the positive feedback on the article, Fred.

No, I don't really know why the Sunoco cars used the SS hoods early in the '68 season. I assumed it might have been for air cleaner clearance but they went to a flat hood after a couple of races and used the same or similar air cleaners at that time.
Logged

Jon Mello
CRG
wolfmin
Member
***
Posts: 48


View Profile Email
« Reply #26 on: June 04, 2012, 12:26:30 PM »

I don't know many of the Javelin facts, but in 2005 I was visiting a friend in Arizona that owns Keefe Performance.  At that time he had Craig Jackson's unusual Javelin at his shop, preparing it for a test at Firebird.  He told me that car was originally one of the Kaplan cars that had become a Penske mule and was never raced by Penske.  Not sure at what point the body was partially changed, either by Penske or perhaps whoever began a restoration.
Logged
Jon Mello
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: June 04, 2012, 01:14:12 PM »

Unfortunately, the car wasn't at the Sonoma Historics last weekend. I had hoped to get a better look at it. I think I remember that there are some things that may be stamped number 3 on the car and, as such, it might be the #3 car raced by Ron Grable for the Javelin team during the '69 season. I don't know that as any kind of fact, it just seems to make sense based on my limited knowledge of the AMC cars. Anybody else have any thoughts?
Logged

Jon Mello
CRG
Jon Mello
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: June 11, 2012, 09:42:02 PM »

Question for the Javelin guys. Two different ads for Javelins from Ted Roberts. Are these two different cars or the same car described first as a '68 and later as a '69. Is the one in the second ad, the car that Buzz Dyer owns?
Logged

Jon Mello
CRG
Jon Mello
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile
« Reply #29 on: July 22, 2012, 03:38:21 PM »

I just bought this oil pan at a recent swap meet. I'm not sure if it is a circle track pan or a road race pan. I also don't recognize the
manufacturer's logo of an M with an arrow through it. The pan is 7.5" deep from the pan rail to the bottom of the sump. The kick-
outs on both sides extend out 3" from the side of the pan. The sump bottom measures 9.75" from front to back and 13.5" across.
There are trap doors on all three sides from where the oil pump pick-up would be. If someone can tell me more about this oil pan,
I would really appreciate it. Thanks.











Logged

Jon Mello
CRG
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6  All Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.078 seconds with 18 queries.