Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted
16 hours ago, Dave Van said:

OK....this is where it would be nice if Randy's NASCAR model forum was still here. 

By 72 NASCAR did not require STOCK suspension on Cup cars but the wording was 'Stock type'. So if showroom car had coils up front and coils out back with trailing arms a 72 Torino could use GM truck trailing arms and many did. BUT Bobby Allison build his Monme Carlos in his shop and he used stock location trail arms (short) So the basic rule is 'Stock Type' but location points and manufacture was FREE. 

They had to have the same configuration as the showroom version, but not stock parts.  The '72 Torino, having coil springs front and rear, would need them on the race version as well.

That really started in 1966-67 with the Fairlanes and Comets using Galaxie frame stubs up front.  A fabricated version of the stub was allowed around 1970.  

The early AMC Matadors ('72-'73) were built by Holman & Moody and were essentially Fords under the skin.  Both cars used coil springs front and rear as built on the assembly line.  I believe the Matadors used Ford rear axles too, as the AMC pieces weren't up to high performance usage.

A real outlier in that period was the Ray Nichels/Chris Vallo/David Pearson Pontiac GTO that ran in NASCAR briefly in 1971.  GM frame, fabricated Ford front stub, GM (probably "truck-arm") rear suspension with a Mopar 8-3/4" rear axle.  As raced, it had coil springs all around so it did fit the rule book, but nothing except sections of the frame were "stock".

  • Like 1
Posted

Yep....the Ford 9" rear became the standard rear for almost all Cup cars until Gen7. It is kinda a poor mans quick change. I run them in my 46 Ford and Mustangs. thx

Posted
On 11/29/2025 at 9:25 AM, espo said:

These were such a ticky tacky add on tape and plastic side panels they were almost sale proof on the showroom floor when new. 

Maybe, but the front end gave people a five year glimpse into the future of what the new 3rd gen Camaro would look like in 1982

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...