32 replies to this topic

[IRRA Retro Racing]

Effective September 1, 2026, the following Stock Car body rule updates will be in effect:

• Body thickness: Bodies should be pulled from no thinner than .010" poly-carbonate material. Finished product minimal thickness must be minimum .007" on the sides and .008" on the hood. No adding of tape in the door or hood area to make thickness. Body reinforcement may be added in other areas.
• Rear height:  1.125"-1.375"on all Charger bodies. Daytona .750"-1.0."
• Wheel wells:  Rear's may be trimmed out to allow for tire clearance. Fronts must follow the trim line.
• Rear bumper height:  min. .750" measured from top of the spoiler down on Chargers.  MIn. .5" on Daytona
• Eliminate weighing of body.

The goal of the rule changes is to make tech easier, ensure racers can obtain properly pulled bodies in good faith from the raceway counter without going through 'special channels,' and improve racing. While the new body specs have found the bodies to be approximately they also handle better.  

 

Additionally we believe any bodies that are pulled from thinner material and 'fluffed' to make thickness will be self-policing in that they run a greater risk on not being able to finish the race. If a manufacture is found to be purposely pulling bodies outside of the specs listed, all of the manufactures bodies will be eliminated from the approved body list. 

 

 

Updated Daytona dimensions on 4/8/26

(Posted by Dom Luongo)

[j-slot]

Any photo or diagram?

[Gil Aubin]

Thank you. 

 

No, let me rephrase that,

 

THANK YOU!!

[slotcarone]

An explanation of the rear bumper height is needed with a picture please. Will currently legal bodies still be legal?

[John Luongo]

If these new specs are the minimum, can older, thicker, heavier non-Dodge NASCAR bodies be used? Such as vintage Lumina or T-Bird. Although not a technical advantage, this would permit raceways to offer in stock NOS bodies that can be used.

 

Thanks.

[Dominator]

All currently approved bodies are listed on the irraracing.com website.

Min/max rear height is measured from the tech block to the top of the spoiler. Over the years the question of "what is severe raking" has come up and we felt it was time to put a number on it.

[Bridgehampton66]

Fellas,

 

Thank you for your deliberations and the new rules.

 

Personally, looking forward to being able to marshal a Charger that won't fold up in my hand like a Kleenex. And to having something on my own car that's a lot closer in measured dimensions to what the guys at the very front are using.

[Matt Sheldon]

That body is now thinner. It is going to be more fragile within your iron claw than the current version. Without a weight rule in effect now, the interiors will progress back to as thin as possible while being held in with as little tape as possible. Choosing which marshal you come off in front of may be the most important strategy.

[JerseyJohn]

It looks like there is a representative on the IRRA board from almost all Retro Groups except Retro East. Retro East was a foundational part of the movement from the beginning, it deserves a dedicated voice in current board. While no one can replace the legacy of Noose, someone from Retro East should be on the board.

 

Just my 2 cents. 

[slotcarone]

Agree with Jersey John!

[Hot Slots]

My simpleton brain is having some issues with the rear height and rear bumper height.

Is the rear bumper height the minimum rear bumper length? .750" from the top of the spoiler down?

I get the rear height of 1.250" for the Daytona, etc.

Is there going to be some clarification on the F1 bodies also? The way I read the rules is that only one body can measure 1.375" max height, all others 1.125" yet at every race my McLaren is legal at 1.375", unless my simpleton brain is failing me again.

 

[Jay Guard]

Brandon:

Yes, the minimum size of the rear of the stockcar body is .750", that is from the top of the spoiler down to the bottom of the body.

 

As for the F1 bodies, a "Lotus 49 style" body is basically any body that has front wings and large rear spoiler.  At the time the F1 rules were written many were still using bodies like the Maserati which just had relatively low exhaust pipes and no front wings.  Virtually any body with the large rear spoiler and front wings would fall under the "Lotus 49" rules.

[Dominator]

As requested here are pics explaining the rear bumper height.  

 

 

 

 

 

[slotcarone]

As requested here are pics explaining the rear bumper height.  

 

20260319_075214.jpg

 

 

So this really is the total height of the rear of the body not just the bumper.

 

[Dominator]

Measurement from the top of spoiler to the bottom of the bumper.

Rear body height is measured from tech block to top of spoiler.

[Matt Sheldon]

It looks like there is a representative on the IRRA board from almost all Retro Groups except Retro East. Retro East was a foundational part of the movement from the beginning, it deserves a dedicated voice in current board. While no one can replace the legacy of Noose, someone from Retro East should be on the board.

 

Just my 2 cents. 

John - I agree with you on this.

 

Each active region that operates under the IRRA ruleset should be considered when backbone rules that have been in place since inception are on the discussion for change. The messy part would be who is in charge or whose voice matters the most from each. This move appeases a dozen or less of the countries top retro racers. That is it. It is a decision that simply moves the root cause of the rule change to the next thickness of body. The participants that were the cause of the rule change just use their knowledge for the next. 

 

Retro East is for sure the foundation of what we know the IRRA to currently be. As Noose always said, it it doesn't happen out east, it is not needed. His iron fist mentality and standing firm on retros intent was the foundation that protected the ruleset. Its consistency is what the true recipe of it has been. How the cars have developed and the quality of racers all stems from almost everything the East has done. I am not taking anything away from D3 or any IRRA regions with that statement. 

 

I have always supported the IRRA rules regardless if I agreed with them. The fact that they were consistent is what has always been what mattered the most to me. Our participation at the raceway and the reason that we have been able to grow is taking that consistency mindset and applying it to what we do. Our retro growth has been phenomenal for many reasons, but one of the main factors is that we are able to show that consistency within the rules and promote the equality that retro provides. We have all weathered the motor debates and life of retro has been great over the last 5 years. Hell, people even get along these days. .

 

From my POV the regions of the IRRA were ignored in this decision. It is not a decision that had the racer majority's best interest in mind. There were zero issues with the rule as printed. 

 

"It is just a body". No it is not, it is much more than that. It is the start of the decrease in value of what a successful ruleset really means and has meant. What is next is the question that should be asked!

 

I am not the voice of the Rocky Mountain Region. I am however the voice of our growing raceway with a successful retro program. Successful because our customers and participants have bought into a proven and successful division of SlotCar racing. It does not and should not emulate flexi or scale racing. It is not what the intent has been or should be. 

[Dominator]

Gentleman, this is a rules update post.  If you would like to start a separate discussion for nominee's to the board please start a new thread.  

 

As for the body rule being adjusted to accommodate the dozen or so top racers in the country I assure you it does not.  We had a racer at Palooza last year get bounced from tech in stock car because the body did not meet the specs.  The body was purchased over the counter at a raceway.  So it's the racers fault that they got a non-conforming body?  Why penalize the racer who by the way is mostly a B or C main racer when they purchased the body in good faith believing it would meet the specs?  A "squeeze test" only tells so much and is hardly accurate.  

 

And for the record the previous stock car rules update was 99% my push.  I got ridiculed for wanting to weigh the bodies, roof thickness, and window thickness.   The first fall brawl we had this rule I literally spent over 3 hours talking to racers at the track about how the bodies would be tech, why they were being teched this way, and what the goal was.  Most didn't like it but accepted it.    We did talk to track owners and racers from other regions before    before making this move.   This is why the rule is not taking effect until September 1st.   As for consistency of the rules, we haven't needed to make an update in almost 2 years.  Seems pretty consistent to me.  

[Gil Aubin]

Dom, as you know this has happened to me as well, including once by you LOL.  I can't speak to other racers, or other parts of the country, but this change makes my personal race prep a lot easier and a lot more cost effective.  

[Jay Guard]

Guys:  Here are a few of the benefits that you may not have thought about concerning these relatively minor stockcar rule changes.

 

This will help the tech inspectors and racers in that it now gives easy-to-check specific dimensions for rear body height rather than the impossible to enforce "no excessive rake" rule.  It also eliminates excessive slamming of the bodies.  And its easy to check with a 6" scale.

 

It gives a specific minimum dimension for the rear of the body which was previously not well defined by rules.  This can easily be checked with the .750" tire size feature on existing tech tools or even a 6 inch scale.

 

It removes the nearly impossible-to-enforce requirement to cut the rear wheel well per the lines on the body.  You can now cut the wheel wells out to clear the rear tires and due to the new rear spoiler height rule, you will still have a good bit of fender left above the rear tire.

 

It gives consistent body thickness requirements between all of the classes and will help the manufacturers in not having to stock .015" thick material. 

 

Everybody's car should handle a bit better, thus making races in this somewhat difficult-to-drive class a bit less of a crash fest.

 

As with all rule changes it will take a while for everyone to get used to the changes, but we believe that given a bit of time these changes will be seen as beneficial for all racers.

[Cap Henry]

So what happens now when someone gets a thin .010 body that doesnt pass tech? It cant be fixed with tape, so its useless. No different than the .015 body?

Nothing is fixed, you just moved the problem.

The manufacturers are going to struggle to pull these bodies to meet these specs. Stock car molds are taller than all the other molds.

[JerseyJohn]

John - I agree with you on this.

 

Each active region that operates under the IRRA ruleset should be considered when backbone rules that have been in place since inception are on the discussion for change. The messy part would be who is in charge or whose voice matters the most from each. This move appeases a dozen or less of the countries top retro racers. That is it. It is a decision that simply moves the root cause of the rule change to the next thickness of body. The participants that were the cause of the rule change just use their knowledge for the next. 

 

Retro East is for sure the foundation of what we know the IRRA to currently be. As Noose always said, it it doesn't happen out east, it is not needed. His iron fist mentality and standing firm on retros intent was the foundation that protected the ruleset. Its consistency is what the true recipe of it has been. How the cars have developed and the quality of racers all stems from almost everything the East has done. I am not taking anything away from D3 or any IRRA regions with that statement. 

 

I have always supported the IRRA rules regardless if I agreed with them. The fact that they were consistent is what has always been what mattered the most to me. Our participation at the raceway and the reason that we have been able to grow is taking that consistency mindset and applying it to what we do. Our retro growth has been phenomenal for many reasons, but one of the main factors is that we are able to show that consistency within the rules and promote the equality that retro provides. We have all weathered the motor debates and life of retro has been great over the last 5 years. Hell, people even get along these days. .

 

From my POV the regions of the IRRA were ignored in this decision. It is not a decision that had the racer majority's best interest in mind. There were zero issues with the rule as printed. 

 

"It is just a body". No it is not, it is much more than that. It is the start of the decrease in value of what a successful ruleset really means and has meant. What is next is the question that should be asked!

 

I am not the voice of the Rocky Mountain Region. I am however the voice of our growing raceway with a successful retro program. Successful because our customers and participants have bought into a proven and successful division of SlotCar racing. It does not and should not emulate flexi or scale racing. It is not what the intent has been or should be. 

 

Matt I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU 100 %

Edited by JerseyJohn, 19 March 2026 - 07:01 PM.

[Matt Sheldon]

Gentleman, this is a rules update post.  If you would like to start a separate discussion for nominee's to the board please start a new thread.  

 

As for the body rule being adjusted to accommodate the dozen or so top racers in the country I assure you it does not.  We had a racer at Palooza last year get bounced from tech in stock car because the body did not meet the specs.  The body was purchased over the counter at a raceway.  So it's the racers fault that they got a non-conforming body?  Why penalize the racer who by the way is mostly a B or C main racer when they purchased the body in good faith believing it would meet the specs?  A "squeeze test" only tells so much and is hardly accurate.  

 

And for the record the previous stock car rules update was 99% my push.  I got ridiculed for wanting to weigh the bodies, roof thickness, and window thickness.   The first fall brawl we had this rule I literally spent over 3 hours talking to racers at the track about how the bodies would be tech, why they were being teched this way, and what the goal was.  Most didn't like it but accepted it.    We did talk to track owners and racers from other regions before    before making this move.   This is why the rule is not taking effect until September 1st.   As for consistency of the rules, we haven't needed to make an update in almost 2 years.  Seems pretty consistent to me.  

Dom, appreciate the reply.

 

I am sure there are bodies that have not conformed to the current rules. Not by intent to deceive, but by the nature of the process. And you are correct, that is not the racers fault, nor should they be punished for it. But why is that not pushed back on the manufacturer? They submit a body for approval and know the specs that are required. If they cannot adhere to that specification, then that would be on them. Going to .010 does not correct any of that, not even the slightest. You are mistaken if you think that the body manufacturers are going to be able to hold the new published spec on an .010 body. Pulling to an .008 hood and .007 sides continually and without a non passable variance is going to be extremely difficult. To think that this somehow corrects the root cause or makes it easier for the average guy is absurd. 

 

Your prior change was in fact a step in the right direction to protect the rules as printed. It was a great move to increase parity amongst all racers. Just like the new guidelines for height, rear wheel cutouts and added specs. All needed and add to the intent of the rules as printed. Giving in because some cannot handle the stomach pains of tech is not the answer. Your are correct, there "was" consistency. This change voids that statement. 

 

A couple failed off the shelf clear bodies is not an epidemic. Guys pushing .010 bodies through tech and having them pass, is. 

 

I have enough texts going back 6 years from Noose and premier racers that support my original comments. I will leave it at that.

 

I have stated my side. I will stand on every word. Happy Racing!

[John Luongo]

over the years stock car body specs have always been a good topic for discussion. NASCAR has had the same problem, remember smokey yunicks 7/8 scale chevelle? a lighter body design would make the car less top heavy and can improve handling on some of the road courses we race on. weekly racing on an oval can tear up a thinly made body quickly. we used .015 bodies with tape reinforcements to get more than one race out of a body. its possible that thin bodies being run on an oval may not stand up to the carnage. the new ruling for sept may make tech go faster, permit track owners to use up their inventories. repairing a damaged body under green flag conditions will take away any advantage that a thin body may initially have, esp when racing for finishing position and points. looking forward to sept, i may get a dodge body. best regards

[Cap Henry]

It gives consistent body thickness requirements between all of the classes and will help the manufacturers in not having to stock .015" thick material. 
 
Everybody's car should handle a bit better, thus making races in this somewhat difficult-to-drive class a bit less of a crash fest.

Couple points here:

The manufactures will still have to stock .015" material and bodies; FCR type racing has adopted .015" bodies as they were readily available because of Retro, and it was sort of a mid ground between hard bodies and regular Lexan bodies, they lasted longer and were easier to pick up for a marshal with a heavy chassis under it. So now manufacturers will have to stock to thicknesses.

Stock Car was always meant to be different. It wasn't meant to be another fast class.

What regions were asked about this? From what I can tell, Retro East/Matt Bruce weren't involved, Penn-Ohio wasn't involved, and Colorado possibly wasn't involved. One and three probably have some of the best current attendance.

There are parts of this updated ruling that are good. The max rear height, allowing rear wheels cut out, rear bumper dimension; all great.

I just don't see anything that shows we aren't going to be talking about thin stock car bodies again.

[Hot Slots]

I like them fast.

It's my favorite.

MSFA