Smokey's Six

blueroo

Well-known member
Hey all,
I was just wondering if anyone had some info on Smokey Yunick's old Hudson six cylinder. I was told he reworked the motor to spin backwards and it did amazing things to the powerband. Does anybody have any info?
 
I always wondered if you could get an engine to run backwards. If you think about the pistons are doing the same thing.
 
I remember reading an interview of Smokey and he mentioned this. IIRC he did it so the torque would tend to lower the left side of the car. It didn't make more power from turning backwards but it made more power because the cam wasn't stock (like it was supposed to be). Impossible to run a stock cam backwards :wink: Just another way that Smokey "got competetive".
Joe
 
The piston pins would probably then be offset to favour more direct thrust, as opposed to quieter running. I've heard of people doing this on some stock classes because the parts are stock, but the installation isn't!

Regards, Adam.
 
He did it by grinding a marine cam for counter rotating engine with race profile, that flipping the rearend to get tire rotation right.
Torque loading was then to the inside of NASCAR left hand turn.

Then there was his 7/8 scale Chevelle------ :roll:
 
Maybee the 66 7/8 th scale Chevelle.

Other one was the tech guys dropping the fuel tank for an inspection, then knocking him back on 17 other legal infringements. Smokey of course told them the ruling was all wrong.

"Make that 18 infingements"

and he drove off without the fuel tank attached, the engine still running.

In car racing there are only loosers loosing honstly and the cheaters winning handsomely. The rule book was designed for loopholes, and competitive advantage comes from pushing the envelope.
 
My SuperCross (motorbikes, not temperament!) mate says that - "There are cheats, and there are losers". The grey area is fun!
 
xecute®™© he he":vdhvnxt2 said:
...In car racing there are only loosers loosing honstly and the cheaters winning handsomely. The rule book was designed for loopholes, and competitive advantage comes from pushing the envelope.

In car racing it is known as "getting competetive", not "cheating" :roll: Smokey was one of the greatest innovators in ways to get competetive. The other guys would be very upset because they knew they were cheating and STILL couldn't beat him :lol:
Joe
 
Smoky wrote the NASCAR rule book. Or at least he made them write it by finding loopholes as fast as they could fill them.

7/8 scale Chevelle (that gave us the famous templates)
Air vents behind rear glass in front of trunk lid ducting hi pressured air from under the car to low pressure drag area. Pull a little vacuum.
Bondo smooth under side, better flow out, less pressure under.
Gas tank roll cage. PanAm Linc racers had gas in doors.
Left rotating engine
Race car suspended too low, used 2x4" pieces for shims to meet regulation height, fell out at first bump.

Jim Hall of Chaparral fame was about the same. Everytime he came up with something truely unique, CanAm outlawed it. High rear wing, then the articulated wing linked to brakes, ground effect skirts that touched the ground and then moveable skirts. Then was the sucker car.
What ticked Hall off was CanAm was supposed to be an UN-LIMITED series.
Wings are still in, Porsche and a Jap car has an articulated one to match speed. Ground effect has been developed to the nth degree. Glass re-enforced plastic structural monocoque tub and auto trans big influence on today's racers design.

Everybody cheated a little, Ford's Talledaga (and Mercury clone) had the spot weld flange between underbody tray and outer body shell left oversized and untrimmed decreasing side body clearane by 1.75 to 2.0"
That help maintain the low pressure area under car at speed for ground effects.
 
One year at Indy when AJ Foyt didn't get the pole, some reporter asked him about the car that did. AJ's response was "Sumbitch is cheatin'." When the reporter followed up with the obvious question "how do you know?" AJ's response was "Cause he's faster than me and I'm cheatin'.''
 
If you're wondering about trying the roll/cage gas tank idea, I wouldn't. In a wreck you're literally surrounded by gasoline. For off-road, it would probably create too-high of a center of gravity.
If you're wondering how it filled because the cage would be above the filler, count me in too.
 
Almost as good as the reputed Nitrous oxide in the roll cage for the Group B Delta Integrale. If the cheating is too widespread, the formula dies. Like Group A died, like Group B died.

Good thing is, Daytonas first NASCAR-style stock car race had its winner in 1949 wasdisqualified for what, not cheeting for the El Shadais sake. A succession of acriminous battles of corporate cheeting (Hemi, SOHC, Shot Gun Semi Hemi 385, the SVO A3 head rework)...

Cheeting is the way of competion. Like a curfew,the limits have to be tested every night!

The NASCAR rule book is drafted by achitects with smarts, and they have done really well over the last 56 years. And if you decide a year in advance what the rule book says, then you've got it all under control. 12 months to sort a palatable excuse.:hmmm: :wink:

I love it! Smokey was the miester of advancing the preperation skills, within the letter of the rule book!
 
StrangeRanger":3a3qipkl said:
One year at Indy when AJ Foyt didn't get the pole, some reporter asked him about the car that did. AJ's response was "Sumbitch is cheatin'." When the reporter followed up with the obvious question "how do you know?" AJ's response was "Cause he's faster than me and I'm cheatin'.''
:hmmm: :hmmm: :rolflmao: :rolflmao:

That sounds so much like him.
 
Titleist16 said:
I always wondered if you could get an engine to run backwards. If you think about the pistons are doing the same thing.

My dad has a boat with a 2 350's one of them runs backwards. Allot of boats are set up that way

"Thad said:
He did it by grinding a marine cam for counter rotating engine with race profile, that flipping the rearend to get tire rotation right. :wink:
 
The two Allison V-12s in the WW2 Lockheed P-38 Lightning fighter plane had opposite rotation. The designers assumed this would be a good idea, but in the middle of the production run they started wondering how much difference it really made. So they pulled a new airplane off the line, equipped it with two normal-rotation engines, and test-flew it. They found out they had guessed right; performance wasn't nearly as good as in the production airplanes.
 
I hope some of you enjoy the old airplane lore and boat racing lore which I gratuitously supply, and hope it doesn't annoy the rest of you. I'll stop if you think it is superfluous.
 
Back
Top