|| *Comments on the 1985 Pepsi Firecracker 400:* View the most recent comment <#77> | Post a comment <#post> Tweet 1. Jeff posted: 01.23.2005 - 6:19 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) This ranks as one of the greatests upsets in NASCAR history. Greg Sacks was an afterthought in the race, driving and R&D car for DiGard testing, and pulled off one of the more improbable wins in NASCAR history. 2. Chicago posted: 04.11.2005 - 3:57 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) Perhaps the greatest upset in history ... just because I bet no one would've picked Sacks to have the "drive of his life" -- and because Bill Elliott was so dominant at the time. Amazing race. 3. Darrell posted: 11.11.2005 - 10:14 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I read an article that since Sacks was just an R&D driver, they were going to have him run a set number of laps, come in so they could change the shocks, then go back out and run a set number of laps, and so on. But when he started running with Elliott, the plan was scrapped. I think if DiGard stayed alive, Sacks probably would have a few more Cup victories. 4. underdogfan posted: 02.13.2006 - 10:20 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) Not to mention that they only had two people as a pit crew. You're exactly right, they were supposed to run until the leaders started pitting, then pull to the garage, put in a different set of shocks, make another run, change the shocks again, make a third run, then park it. But he was running so well, that they decided to make a run for the win, and pitted at odd times, recruiting crew members from lower budget race teams that had fallen out or already pitted. 5. Anonymous posted: 12.27.2006 - 4:35 pm Rate this comment: (2) (9) Everyone mentions that Gary Nelson probably slipped in an oversized motor with that DiGard research and development car, but let's not forget that Bill Elliott monopolized the superspeedways that year with his Ford Thunderbird that was only sevenths / eighths scale. Sacks had purchased Junior Johnson's old Chevrolets and finished sixth in February with his family team, so to see him running well wasn't a shock, but for him to win? Pretty incredible. 6. myself posted: 02.15.2007 - 3:41 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) I was at this race. The car Sacks won in was actually a car that Digard purchased from Harry Ranier. Its the same car Cale ran 3rd in in the 84' Firecracker 400. Sitting in the stands, no one, except for those listening to MRN, knew who was driving the 10 car. I didn't even hear the driver's name til' after the race was over! 7. MegaRacer posted: 09.24.2007 - 10:42 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) The final win for the once mighty DiGard team. 8. Jay Coker posted: 10.14.2007 - 5:10 pm Rate this comment: (9) (1) Sorry, but Bill's car wasn't 7/8ths scale. The won all of those races in 1985 by hard work, not because of a gimmick car. 9. Jeff Wagoner posted: 11.03.2007 - 6:02 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) That car Yarborough finished third with in '84 at Daytona ended up becoming an ARCA car after Sacks was done with it. Joe Neimiroski drove the car in the 1992 ARCA finale at Atlanta. 10. DieselDan posted: 11.18.2007 - 1:09 am Rate this comment: (4) (0) Bill Elliott's advantage that year was 1) Dawsonville, GA shop 2)the last Cleveland block Ford small blocks 3) a brother who could tune engines with Roger Penske's old equipment 11. myself posted: 02.21.2008 - 2:05 pm Rate this comment: (1) (9) Jay Coker & DiesleDan....its been proven & published that the '85 Elliott ride was 7/8 scale. 12. Mark posted: 03.29.2008 - 5:07 pm Rate this comment: (10) (1) Never been proven that Elliott's 85 car was 7/8 scale. Only person to say that was Darrell Waltrip, I don't see how that is proof. 13. DieselDan posted: 04.28.2008 - 8:02 am Rate this comment: (9) (1) I saw Elliott's car go through tech at Darlington at both races. His car matched all templets and measuring sticks perfectly as any of the other Ford teams. This 7/8ths scale crap is just that, crap. Hell, that was 23 years and nothing can change that now. 14. Clayton posted: 07.01.2008 - 4:15 pm Rate this comment: (2) (0) The only reason why that 7/8th scale thing came out was because NASCAR had no idea what Ernie Elliott was doing to make the car go so fast. Then they decided to run the restrictor plate and that ended the dominance of the 9 car! 15. Scott posted: 12.08.2008 - 2:51 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) If I ever made up a list of the 10 greatest upsets in auto racing, this would be on the list, but of course, Wide World of Sports could only show the highlights. Great job ABC! 16. ChazzyJoe posted: 12.29.2008 - 11:08 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Also, this was the first July race at Daytona with "Pepsi" in the name. It would be the Pepsi Firecracker 400 until 1989, when it was renamed the Pepsi 400. 17. Ryan posted: 01.29.2009 - 5:05 pm Rate this comment: (2) (7) They started running restricted engines because Bobby Allison almost went into the stands at Talladega in 1987. I must agree with myself for a change. Bill had a 7/8 scale car. You could even tell by watching on TV. Even the little model cars that came out that year were 7/8. There is no doubt about that. Oh well, cheating caught up with him, because he lost the title that year. 18. Clayton posted: 06.30.2009 - 6:13 pm Rate this comment: (0) (1) yeah it was the Bobby Allison wreck. That's why they went to a smaller carborator, at Talladega in 1988 and Bill dominated. They had to stop this man who no one could catch. So that's why the created a restrictor plate. Bill was forced to raise his roof a 1/2 inch, run a carborator plate, and still beat everyone. That Bobby Allison wreck was just a good excuse. If it was such a concern about fans being hurt, why is the same sport, doing NOTHING when Carl Edwards did the same thing 21 years later? 19. RaceFanX posted: 07.21.2009 - 12:30 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Texas racer Eldon Dotson's second and final Cup race 20. The Corrector posted: 12.21.2009 - 7:26 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Clayton, you should probably learn how to spell "carburetor" before you go ranting and raving about one. 21. 3man posted: 01.28.2010 - 1:30 pm Rate this comment: (6) (0) You people have got to be kidding me with this 7/8ths car nonsense, it was a rumor that grew into legend cause of uninformed people who believe everything they read. Ford was the first to come out with the slick looking racecars that became the norm by the '90s. All the Thunderbirds looked smaller than the boxier GM cars. It's no different than '88 when GM introduced the "downsized" Buicks and Pontiacs, they looked noticable smaller than the boxier Monte Carlos that were still being used, and the now 4 year old Thunderbirds. Bobby Allison dominated that race in the Buick. Now if the Elliott's were cheating somewhere else, well, they were just doing a better job than Junior Johnson, Gary Nelson, and all the other "masterminds" of the sport that had been making a living off skirting the rules for decades. Kudos to them! 22. dUDE gUY posted: 03.31.2010 - 12:38 pm Rate this comment: (2) (0) Hey Clayton, I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that after the Carl Edwards crash at Talladega, they made the catch fence there taller and sturdier, and I believe they also made the mesh closer together so it can catch smaller bits of debris. I'm not entirely sure that's the case though, as my memory can be a bit sketchy at times, but that's what I remember reading anyways. Anyways, here is a neat stat I found while poring through Bill Elliott's stats: This was Bill Elliott's first top five in 1985 that wasn't a win. Beofre this race, he had 7 wins, and only two other top ten finishes (6th place finishes at both North Wilkesboro and Riverside). 23. WillG_46 posted: 05.19.2010 - 12:17 pm Rate this comment: (1) (6) Watch any video on Youtube and you can clearly see that Elliott's car was narrower than any other car out there. 24. myself posted: 05.20.2010 - 1:04 pm Rate this comment: (1) (7) WillG_46 is dead on the money. Numerous instances in '85, Elliott's & Yarborough's Fords were on the front row. Very plain to the naked eye to see the #9 was a narrower car. 25. martin-n-rusty posted: 07.03.2010 - 4:21 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) And then you see why NASCAR eventually over time, standarized the cars. So you wouldn't have bullcrap arguments like this. 26. zuel660 posted: 07.09.2010 - 7:47 pm Rate this comment: (3) (0) If Bill's car is so obviously smaller to all of you watching grainy 25 year old movies, don't you think that other crews would have noticed that as the cars sat on the grid or in the garage at that time? Bill's cars were superior that year thanks to hard work & awesome Ernie Elliott engines. Bill's car would have been just as dominant if it was 1-1/8 scale! If there was any cheating going on here, I would believe it came from the Gary Nelson-wrenched #10 in this race! He was long known as the king of the cheaters!! 27. zuel660 posted: 07.09.2010 - 7:51 pm Rate this comment: (3) (0) & Smokey Yunick DID build a 7/8 scale Chevy in the late 60's, & NASCAR DID catch him in tech. I think people are confusing the two stories! 28. Anonymous posted: 12.11.2010 - 11:41 pm Rate this comment: (4) (0) When Greg Sacks caught Terry Labonte to put him a lap down with a handful of laps to go, he curiously refused to pass him. Sacks waited until the backstretch on the last lap before he put his foot down and powered around Labonte to put him a lap down. After the race, Sacks admitted that he thought he was racing Labonte for the win, and since he had no spotter there was no one to tell him Labonte was on a different lap. 29. Anonymous posted: 02.24.2011 - 10:53 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) The postscript to this race is that DiGard's regular driver, Bobby Allison, quit because he was so angry/embarrassed about a one-off team winning while he was a non-factor (18th, four laps down). Allison formed his own team to finish the season, while Sacks replaced him at DiGard. 30. Anonymous posted: 02.25.2011 - 9:59 pm Rate this comment: (2) (0) Bobby Allison was an expert at acting like a baby. In other news, the jackman on the makeshift pit crew for the #10 car was an Ivy League football player who had never even seen a race before that day. 31. Roger posted: 07.31.2011 - 9:47 am Rate this comment: (1) (1) I guess Elliott had a 7/8 car when he dominated Indy in 2002 and blew the doors of Jimmie Johnson in 2003. Its a shame Nascar let him drive that 7/8 car in 1992 during one of the best seasons ever. Bill Elliott did not have a narrower car people. Wake up. Nascar would not have allowed Elliott to drive a narrower car made obvious by the stupid headlight pit stop at the 1985 Daytona 500. Nascar wasn't run by a bunch of idiots (that's actually more likely now) back then, you can go back and see numerous people getting caught for things like DW's mystery fuel. Elliott would not have been allowed to have an advantage like that for a whole season. Look no further than Sterlin Marlin's success in his first two year tenure with Dodge if you don't think it was Ernie Elliott engines. Furthermore Elliott didn't lose the 1985 championship because "karma" got him for cheating. Elliott was just not good on short tracks most of the time and you can easily see that that cost him in the long run. One thing that wrapped up a championship for him in 1988 was his major improvement on short tracks. Elliott has proved giving ample equipment he will just flat out dominate yet we still have to deal with this stupid argument....news flash Elliott doesn't need to cheat to be successful.... 32. Ryan posted: 08.13.2011 - 5:10 am Rate this comment: (1) (5) Sorry Rog, but it was 7/8. And we're just talking about the 1985 season. "yeah it was the Bobby Allison wreck. That's why they went to a smaller carborator, at Talladega in 1988 and Bill dominated. They had to stop this man who no one could catch. So that's why the created a restrictor plate. Bill was forced to raise his roof a 1/2 inch, run a carborator plate, and still beat everyone. That Bobby Allison wreck was just a good excuse. If it was such a concern about fans being hurt, why is the same sport, doing NOTHING when Carl Edwards did the same thing 21 years later?" Do a grammar and spell check, ok? He didn't win at Talladega in 1988. What are you talking about? 33. zuel660 posted: 10.31.2011 - 11:31 am Rate this comment: (3) (0) All of you claim to have 'proof'of Elliott having a 7/8 scale car. So where is this 'proof'?? Unless you can cite documented accounts of this(of which there are none!!), quit trying to perpetuate this nonsense!! 34. nwt0 posted: 12.05.2011 - 10:47 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) The only case I can think of that a potential start and park car won a race. 35. nascarfan2234 posted: 07.23.2012 - 8:58 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) this was crazy race in all of NASCAR 36. RaceFanX posted: 09.26.2012 - 11:35 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) This was Sacks' only Cup win in 263 starts in the series. He only had two other top-5s, both with Rick Hendrick equipement in 1990 (a second at Talladega in the Slim Fast car and a second at MIS subbing for an injured DW). Sacks best finish before this race was, ironically, the previously-mention sixth in the Daytona 500 earlier in 1985. 37. Ben Gunby posted: 12.20.2012 - 6:09 pm Rate this comment: (4) (0) Agree that the 7/8 bit is a great bit for conversation, but anyone stating it's known fact, or proven, is just being an idiot. To make the statement as though it's fact, and there is no disputing it is just wrong. Can people theorize on it? Sure. Might there be some truth to it? Who the hell knows. But you don't run a car THAT much smaller for a full season and nobody notice. I mean, just two years earlier NASCAR levied some HEAVY fines on Richard Petty of all people, but you think they were protecting the Elliotts? Give me a friggin break. 38. Ryan W posted: 06.23.2013 - 8:23 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) This race is probably a bigger upset than Cope winning the 500 in '90. 39. Walleyewhacker posted: 02.15.2014 - 2:08 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) Didn't Elliott have a fuel pick-up problem at this race and he had to pit sooner which cost him the win? I don't have it on tape buy I seemed to remember some like that happening. 40. letmeby posted: 09.03.2014 - 7:30 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) Still waiting on "proof" that Bill Elliott had a 7/8th car. Does anyone have any? 41. Jim4Bill posted: 11.25.2015 - 2:51 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) There is no proof of the Elliotts cheating with a smaller car. DW keeps chirping about it - but there is no proof. Melling did not do wind tunnel work in 1985. The advantage was the car (built by Bill himself) via handling and Ernie's motors. Ernie was way ahead on head tuning - especially via CNC machining. And his motors lasted....he had been perfected how to make a Ford engine last for years. The source of how to do the CNC work was not from Ford or NASCAR - so nobody else had the information. And yes Melling had Cleveland blocks when most of the Ford teams did not - in 1985. I believe Ranier had them as well - that is why Cale could pretty much run with Bill on the big tracks. 42. BJ posted: 12.24.2015 - 7:06 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) i've seen clips of this race and i remember Bobby Allison was PISSED that the r and d car won over him 43. Sam posted: 12.24.2015 - 2:40 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) After this upset win this was Greg Sacks only Cup victory he win later win a Busch race at Talladega in 1996 44. myself posted: 02.17.2016 - 2:42 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Booby Allison was always pissed. 45. bigjohnson posted: 04.04.2016 - 6:07 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) Sacks car had some different front end parts and I think something different about the frame which allowed it to be lower or more aerodynamic, something like that. I know he said it was fast but very loose. Probably the loosest car he ever drove. His pit crew was all volunteer and not nearly as fast as the top crews. All of his stops were slow except the last one. A crew from another team did his final pit stop to keep him from losing so much ground. 46. James posted: 01.14.2017 - 11:07 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) In response to the guy who said he seen the inspection of Elliots car. They never measured the width back then. Also I seen some people blaming Allison for the whole dispute. Calling him a whiner and such. But I'm with Bobby on this one. DiGard scrwed themselves and went down the tubes fast. 47. zuel660 posted: 08.24.2017 - 2:49 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) Keeping in mind that wheelbase for a Cup car at that time still had to be 110"....IF (& that's a huge IF) the Elliotts had built a 7/8" scale T-Bird, the body would have been roughly 9" narrower, 6-1/2" lower, & just over 2 feet shorter than a standard T-Bird....I think that wouldv'e been just a TEENY BIT conspicuous to everyone else at the track!! 48. Jim posted: 12.22.2017 - 10:28 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Last Cup race for the late Texas driver Eldon Dotson. 49. Chad posted: 02.18.2018 - 7:39 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) I was at that race. Bill had the pole and led most laps but he had a vibration in his drive train Determined to be a bent drive shaft. He finished 2nd about half lap back. And no he didn't have a 7/8 scale car. DW started that and everyone over the years Believe it. And a part off his dominance in 85??Look at bills 84 vs 85 car. Head on. He got that idea from cake Yarbrough. 50. zuel660 posted: 06.04.2018 - 11:43 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) @41 - During the '85 Daytona 500, Waddell Wilson talked about the Ranier team building a Windsor-based Ford engine. I believe that was the reason for Cale havng so many engine failures that year...the car was fast, but wouldn't last, at least in the first half of the year. I never heard if it was all Windsor, or a Cleveland-headed Windsor....if it was the latter, that may explain their overheating issues at Daytona, as water passages differ greatly between the 2 Ford engines. They must've either switched configurations or figured it out later that year, as Cale won at Talladega and Charlotte, 51. Paulie posted: 07.05.2018 - 6:55 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Zuel600-- From what I recall, you are correct. CBS had some discussion about the Ranier fords and Windsors in their coverage as they called the #28 the "Teakettle". I think the 7/8s points are conspiracy theory. Bill himself said Ernie mastered induction and that was their horsepower advantage for those 3 years. 52. Goernie28 posted: 07.11.2018 - 8:44 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) As I recall, Bobby Allison's contract with DiGard Racing specified that his was the only car and he was the only driver for the team. Entering Sacks and the R&D team broke that contract so Allison left and raced his own cars for the rest of 1985. Sacks' win didn't help matters, I'm sure. 53. Anonymous posted: 07.11.2018 - 9:45 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) The 7/8ths theory is preposterously stupid. If you lined up forty men, thirty nine of them six feet tall and one of them five feet three, do you not think the short one would stand out like a sore thumb? 54. Alex posted: 07.11.2018 - 10:31 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Although Bill does suggest in his autobiography that the stuff under the hood of that car might not have been 100% honest, he never once mentions a 7/8th car, and he's pretty darned honest in that book, even going so far as to talk about Starr. There have been some blatant (even NASCAR sanctioned, like the Yellow Banana) cheats over the years, but if anything was illegal on the 1985 Coors Ford it was 100% under the hood. NASCAR threw bogus cautions during races that year just to keep Elliott from lapping the field at races because even they couldn't figure out what was up with that car. 55. Scott B posted: 07.11.2018 - 11:23 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) The "7/8th scale" car is being erroneously attributed to Elliott's team for some reason. #27 is correct, that story is actually based on Chevelle built by Smokey Yunick many years earlier. Maybe not literally 7/8 scale, but cheated up for sure with reduced dimensions. Smokey openly spoke about it, he's never been one to deny his, shall we say, "innovations." The rumors I've always heard about the Elliot T-birds were that they had found a way to improve airflow into the engine. Maybe legal, maybe not. But the undersized body rumors are BS, NASCAR tech would have caught that immediate with the templates used in this era. 56. Sundance27 posted: 07.11.2018 - 11:45 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) I think I remember DW perpetuating the 7/8 rumor on a Fox broadcast either earlier this season or last 57. RaceFanX posted: 09.11.2018 - 3:04 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) A.J. Foyt's #14 had a new sponsor for this race as Copenhagen chewing tobacco came aboard for his NASCAR efforts as part of its multi-series sponsorship of him. The 1964 and 1965 Firecracker 400 winner qualified well and led a lap early on but just as quickly had his Oldsmobile Cutlass sent to the sidelines by a busted axle. 58. John 1994 posted: 12.11.2018 - 9:58 pm Rate this comment: (0) (1) For everyone talking about Bill Elliott 7/8th car, Bill has admitted to cheating in the past. When and where he didn't say. For everyone talking about how big of an upset Sacks winning was I'm going to quote "An Inside Look At The Bad Things Winston Cup Racers Do In Pursuit Of Speed" by Top Jensen "In July 1985, Greg Sacks stunned the NASCAR community by scoring his only career Winston Cup victory at the Firecracker 400 at Daytona. In that race, Sacks drove an unsponsored DiGard "research and development" car that featured a number of "experimental" parts. To this day, Nelson won't talk about the race, the car itself, or the unlikely victory, but few people believe that Sacks's car was 100 percent legal." 59. @58 posted: 12.11.2018 - 10:21 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Source might be useful. In his autobiography he talked about why they were so fast in 1985. Don't recall cheating being anywhere in that chapter.... 60. Anonymous posted: 12.12.2018 - 7:30 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) 58, you have to be borderline retarded to believe Elliott's car was 7/8 scale, that kind of size difference would be immediately obvious with a single glance. That would be like a six foot tall man standing next to a man seven inches shorter and no one noticing. Furthermore, Bill never admitted to cheating, their was an area on the car not covered by the rule book and they narrowed that area up a little without breaking any rules. It's no different than any other team developing ways to go faster within the rules. 61. John 1994 posted: 12.12.2018 - 7:30 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) @59 I wish I had the source. I will try to find it. I can't remember were I read it but I thought I did at some time. 62. John 1994 posted: 12.12.2018 - 12:17 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) @60 I never said I believed the 7/8th theory. I said I thought he admitted to bending the rules before. I can't find any proof of it though. Maybe I was wrong. 63. Anonymous posted: 12.12.2018 - 2:13 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Well, that means you're probably not retarded John. As far as Bill admitting to bending the rules, I'm certain that you're talking about them in 85 exploiting an area of the car which wasn't covered under the rules that year, and no one else had realized they could alter that area of the cars. Nascar put a rule in place for 86 which probably at least partly explains Bills drop off in speed in 86. I have seen an interview with Bill about this. 64. saltsburgtrojanfan posted: 01.12.2019 - 3:54 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Caution 1: Lap 3-5: #2 accident Caution 2: Lap 8-12: #00,99 accident turn 1 Caution 3: Lap 24-26: debris Caution 4: Lap 45-49: #52 spun turn 3 Caution 5: Lap 66-70: #27,43 accident tri-oval Caution 6: Lap 79-83: #75 engine 65. nohbody posted: 01.14.2019 - 6:53 am Rate this comment: (0) (2) 100% confirmed and documented that Elliot had a 7/8 scale car during the 1985 season. He also lost the title and was never as dominant again. 66. Chives5150 posted: 01.15.2019 - 3:11 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Ha, the stupid 7/8ths theory is still alive. 67. Anonymous posted: 06.07.2019 - 3:53 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) 65 - Yeah, in 1985 NASCAR didn't own a tape measure. Ha Ha Ha. 68. Danish_Pie posted: 07.27.2019 - 5:49 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Surprisingly, the first win in Cup for the #10. 69. Steve posted: 09.01.2019 - 4:11 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) The final of 19 times that Cale Yarborough fell directly from the lead to a DNF, according to lap count. 70. John posted: 09.24.2019 - 9:02 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Elliott's car was template compliant, but they found some advantage in the rear quarter area that prompted NASCAR to change the templates. It was legal. It also was fast after the template changes too. 71. Jim4Bill posted: 01.20.2020 - 10:36 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) I was talking to some Georgia boys that said Bill's car was not 7/8 - but back in 1985 the teams would ask for the templates to be send to the shop by NASCAR - the teams would check against the template - and then send it back. The Melling team altered the Ford templates to allow a few important changes to pass inspection and then sent it back to NASCAR - which ensured the Melling T-bird fit the template at all races (and apparently didn't cause an issue on the other T-Birds when the template was checked). When France found out he was pretty pissed but couldn't really do anything about it other than fix the Ford template. 72. possum posted: 01.20.2020 - 7:48 pm Rate this comment: (2) (0) @71 - great story. None of it is true, of course, but it's a great story. Back in the 80's NASCAR would, each year, buy (from a random dealer) a production car of each model which was legal to run in Cup, measure it, and make the templates. Teams could (and of course mostly did) buy copies of the template from NASCAR. The official templates used for inspections never left NASCAR's hands. Back then, tho, you were allowed a tolerance from the template. Unlike today's idiotic .001, it was +/- 0.25 or +/- 0.5, depending on which part of the car was being measured. And the templates ended above the bumper line, and you could do what you wanted below that (as long as it looked more-or-less stock). So a talented car builder could do quite a bit of body manipulation and still fit the template. The story you're relating has it's roots in two much older stories, both of which involve Smokey Yunick. The first was his 1967 Chevelle, which susposedly was a 7/8ths scale version of the production car. It was actually much closer to the real thing in size, but Smokey had built all the body panels by hand (which nobody did in those days) and it just looked different, so everyone thought it was smaller. Back then the rules just said the car had to look stock, tho, and it looked close enough (NASCAR disqualified it for an illegal chassis). The second was a year or two later, when Smokey had another car, a Pontiac, with a hand built body, and got in an arguement about it's legality. He finally told the inspectors to go get a damn car out of the parking lot and measure it to prove his was legal. The inspectors went out, found the nearest Pontiac and measured it, and sure enough Smokey's race car fit. Much later Smokey let on he'd parked his own car, suitably modified, in the parking lot for the inspectors to find. 73. NewGuyOnTheBlock posted: 04.17.2020 - 9:42 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) ABC broadcast this race. Al Trautwig and Sam Posey were in the booth. 74. WJ posted: 05.10.2020 - 5:03 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Non-Bill Elliott or Greg Sacks question. Did David Pearson and Tim Richmond fight after the race? Heard Lake Speed talk about it on the Scene Vault podcast (excellent podcast btw). 75. Tigerman posted: 05.20.2020 - 12:21 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Suggestions regarding DNQ's please correct me if I am wrong. Randy Baker, Buck Baker-owned #87 Buick Jerry Holden, self-owned #48 Chevrolet Dick Skillen, Tom Goff-owned #79 Chevrolet Joey Sonntag, self-owned #65 Chevrolet Ronnie Thomas, self-owned #41 Chevrolet 76. Jim4Bill posted: 09.15.2020 - 9:13 pm Rate this comment: (1) (0) Recently both sides of the coin with DiGard have come to light. 1. Bobby was pissed about the R&D car - but the way Gardner set that up legally it was not a DiGard car - so Bobby could not quit specifically because it ran at Daytona with Sacks as driver. 2. Gardner was in financial trouble - he owed Allison a large chunk of money and Bobby had been threatening leave (but Bill kept him around by saying he would get paid if Bobby was patient). Since DiGard was in breach of contract due to lack of payment to Bobby - the R&D car was a the final straw. Bobby left and gave up trying to get his money - but he could have left sooner since DiGard was in breach. I know Bobby burned some bridges in his career - but he was really not at fault in how DiGard ended. The Gardners ran into financial issues and Bill's brother had health problems (he ran the actual team). Bobby was just a victim of bad circumstances and probably should have left sooner. 77. rateus posted: 02.07.2021 - 11:59 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) JD McDuffie is shown as both starting and non-qualifying the #70 - he's on the starting line-up as taking a provsional so should be removed from the non-qualifiers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Post a comment:* Your comment may not appear immediately - all comments must be approved by the moderator. Name: Comment: