rules pro 4 and cost

[Everfaster]

for the vet's that have been around the racing world, is there realy that big of a differance between MAINTAINING or building a pro 4 car VS. a stock mustang.
please post links to your pro 4 class so i may check you rules. one of the tracks in the area is considering the tube chassis design over the stock
limiting it to stock bolt on componants, rear ends, control arms, 4 link rears. 5 inch springs (no coil overs) not that i see a big difference between
the cost of a spring and shock or coil set up. please your .02

thanks
everfaster

[84Dave]

Check the Rules of www.nwpro4alliance.com . Assuming that your engine Rules do not change drastically, the cost of maintaining the Pro-4 wouldn't be that much different. The main cost would be the tube chassis & associated roll cage. And I can almost assure you that building a GOOD tube-chassis to allow only 'stock' bolt-on's would be nearly as costly as building a full-blown Pro-4 chassis. If I were a conventional Pro-4 chassis builder, and business was decent, I wouldn't take on the task of building such a 'limited' tube-chassis design/setup. -Dave-

[Headhunter]

What would you think these rules would bring the price to? I actually found these on a dirt track website in New York.

RULES 4-CYLINDER MINI STOCKS 2012
1. Pound per cc
2. 500 cfm carb max
3. 8'' wheels w or w/o beadlocks
4. No rollercams
5. No aluminum heads unless factory stock.

[Headhunter]

http://www.pro4mods.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011RevisedRulebook.pdf


New England pro 4 modifieds rules.

[crcltrakr]

Check the Rules of www.nwpro4alliance.com . Assuming that your engine Rules do not change drastically, the cost of maintaining the Pro-4 wouldn't be that much different. The main cost would be the tube chassis & associated roll cage. And I can almost assure you that building a GOOD tube-chassis to allow only 'stock' bolt-on's would be nearly as costly as building a full-blown Pro-4 chassis. If I were a conventional Pro-4 chassis builder, and business was decent, I wouldn't take on the task of building such a 'limited' tube-chassis design/setup. -Dave-

Absolutely correct, Dave, the Northwest Late model 4's were originally "pan cars/steel
bodies", then Pan cars/Plastic Bodies", then tube frames with stock suspensions,and finally the pro 4's as we race them with the alliance. It's cheaper to go all the way with 3 linkR/After market front A frame/coilovers than to build a tube frame angled 4link/McPherson strut (Mustang) or a leaf rear/a frame/coil front (Pinto) hybrid "Amateur" 4. Been there, done that.

[dannyracer6]

Jerry/and Dave..I agree with you guys. When are promotors going to stop trying to play with the old stuff, and get into the 21st century of autoracing. Hornets, stock minis are ok, but iff you really want to go 4 cyl racing, go all the way or dont go at all. the mix and match stuff will never work well as the fab chassis pro 4 cars. I found that out. Had fun but sure did learn a lot. I think the pro4 stuff is as good as it gets. I could have taken my little car to the limits with the add on stuff, and would have spent more and not had the real thing. would have been better to have Eddie just build me one, of find one for sale. Anyway, talk to you guys later.

Dan