HP Reduction Request
 

I am posting a copy of a letter that was sent to the NHRA over a year ago by Dwight, Yac and I. We received no response at the time from them so I am posting it here hoping for a better response from the Racing Community. Please, I'd like to hear your thoughts.
OBTW, I can't take any credit for the actual writing of the letter, that credit should go to Dwight!

Dear NHRA,
This letter is to propose for consideration a change or addition in policy concerning Stock and Super Stock Eliminators with the purpose of encouraging participation by current non-participants. While these suggestions are not meant to be a panacea to “cure all the ills”, there are indications and evidence to support an argument that they could increase participation. While this is primarily pointed toward Stock Eliminator, the principle could be applied to Super Stock as well.

Let us lay out some facts and descriptions of characteristics of racing in Stock Eliminator that are relevant. Consider the following:

Building a competitive Stock Eliminator car is neither inexpensive nor easy in the current environment. Newer factory produced race car combinations are on the upper level of the cost to build race cars.Changes in technology away from rear wheel drive vehicles have reduced the choices of competitive combinations to older cars. Most of the current sets of older competitive race car combinations have been refined to the point that the most technologically advanced cars set the power ratings and thus the standard of performance. “Technologically advanced” equates to expensive and less attractive. Older car bodies are being removed from use for recycling thus reducing the choices for race car combinations. Now, I would like to point out some related behavior in Stock Eliminator racing.

When Paul Wong, or whoever the initiator, got the ’86 Chevrolet pickup accepted into the classification pool, everybody knew that it was a very favorable combination because of the power rating assigned to it. Now there are at least three of those that are being raced and their performance is noted and followed throughout the Stock Eliminator community. Two are being raced by people who were not racing before.

When the full sweep of defactoring of the 1973-1979 Ford 302 2-bbl engines took place, the Stock Eliminator racers recognized the ability for car combinations using those engines to be competitive. As a result, the participation for Ford 302 2-bbl combinations grew from possibly two to now having eight cars in competition across the country, with more on the way. All of those cars except the original two are being raced by new racers.

Bob Shaw has worked to come up with several race car combinations that have been very competitive because of their favorable power ratings. In several cases, he ended up selling his cars to people who wanted to race competitively but could not afford the expense of high tech racing. Bob’s cars have been affordable and thus he is personally responsible for three new racers over the years who have purchased his cars.The major defactoring of the 318 Chrysler 2-bbl engines that occurred several years ago has been responsible for several cars built that would not have been built before.

The logical truth is that a car that will run the index supposedly has the potential to win, but the truth is that it rarely happens. Heads-up races and changing environmental conditions require that a racer be able to perform relative to the index with the majority of the field. Also, the ego part of the racing experience plays a major part in people’s inspiration to race. Since Stock Eliminator carries the image of a performance category, the ability to be able to run under the index in whatever class is a major factor for most racers. In the examples cited above, most of the possible combinations would have been able to run the index when properly prepared. But the attractiveness of a stellar performance is a major factor in the now popularity of those race cars. Also, if each competitor represented in the above examples were interviewed, every one would state that the favorable power rating was the encouragement to build their cars.

So what this letter is about is to propose a change in policy for NHRA regarding the defactoring of certain engines that have never been raced before due to an unattractive power rating. The hope would be to add racers to the Stock Eliminator racing pool and thus help NHRA to increase participation, promote championship drag racing at the grassroots level, and to give some racers an opportunity to participate in class racing that seems to be further and further out of reach. The implementation of this proposal will result in lots of discussion and concern within the racing community. However, the basis of ultimate support for making it acceptable is that the AHFS will eventually level any competitive advantage that would result, much as it does now with the factory race cars and is doing with the combinations mentioned in the example above.

Billy Nees, Mark Yacavone and I have been immersed in Stock Eliminator drag racing for over 40 years each. We have each been intrigued with ferreting out untried, competitive combinations during our racing years and especially those combinations that could be built and raced on a budget. We have collaborated on this proposal with the hopes of increasing interest and participation in Stock Eliminator. We would each be behind the effort to promote it, defend it and encourage it throughout the racing community. We also volunteer our opinions and advice for any considerations that the Tech Department might have as purely professional and analytical advice. We ask for your consideration for this proposal.
Sincerely,

Billy Nees

Dwight Southerland

Mark Yacavone

Proposal One: NHRA Tech Department will allow a racer to request a reduction in the power rating of any engine in the technical bulletins and classification guide, even when the engine has not been raced at an NHRA Championship Event and the racer does not even have a race car that uses the engine in the request. A form would be available on the NHRA Racer web site and the status of all requests would be publicized on a page on that site to reduce duplication of requests. If multiple requests were submitted for the same engine, the first would be the only one considered.

Basic Guidelines for the request:
1) Engine does not have a history of being raced or has not performed better than -.4 sec against the current index.
2) Has to be listed in the class guide and tech bulletins.
3) Maximum reduction 20% of current listed power rating or to the OEM listed and advertised rating, whichever is a higher rating.
4) This is a one-time deal only.* Once a reduction is granted, then the AHFS takes over.
5) Request has to be in writing and the engine clearly defined.
6) Reduction must apply across all manufacturer-models that use the engine. No one-off rating for a particular body style or model.
7) Engine cannot currently have an assigned factor in another manufacturer-model.
8) Engine has to be a unique combination based on some critical component part. For example, a Chev 327 300hp engine from a Corvette that has not been factored could not be reduced to 240 when a 327 275hp engine from a Camaro has the same specs but carries an NHRA-assigned factor.

Optional Proposal Two: NHRA Technical Department will reduce all pre-1971 engine combinations that have no current NHRA-assigned power rating by 20% and reduce all 1972 and later engines to their OEM-assigned rating if the engine has no current NHRA-assigned power rating.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Question, who are these new racers? New to the sport or attracted from the bracket side or elsewhere?

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Incredible write, I'm a new racer actually, deciding on a combo for my car shortly. It seems as though more and more people in my generation are taking interest in the no prep more then anything

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Probably a combination of all those areas and more. It would be hard to gauge how many people are in the shadows and would participate if it were made easier and less expensive.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Don't you think that this statement contradicts what the bulk of your text is trying to say?

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

How about we get the LT1 hp factor lowered?

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

I thought 2 of the 3 racers with the trucks were existing racers? Either way no big deal. How about just giving the indexes back the .3 they removed a half a decade ago? That way everyone benefits, not just new racers or combos. I hardly even start mine anymore.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Proposal # 1 looks good !

proposal # 2 , ummm, well, proposal # 1 looks better.

I had a discussion with a ( now new) Division director about this same subject several months back.

There are combos in the classification guide that have not been tried due to the factored h.p. being too high.

We both agreed that if NHRA made a 20% hp reduction for all OBD II cars it would allow racers to get these '96 and newer car (that are cheap on car lots right now) onto the track.

From there the AHFS will take over.

I consider my mid 80's T-Bird an ancient car now. I cannot imagine how hard it would be to find a nice condition 60's-70's car at a decent price, in decent condition and priced low enough that you can afford to cut on it and put a roll bar in it.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Doesn't fall within the guidelines of this thread.

Let's try to keep this thread .."on topic"

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

^^ That # 1 speaks volumes.

A combo that has not gone more than 4 tenths under most certainly needs some help.

# 2 is a good idea because there are a bunch of dormant combos in the guide all ready to go...just waiting on a hp reduction.
A 20% reduction to the current factored h.p. would most certainly get new racers out to the track.

I have several friends that look thru the classification guide like myself while looking for a combo that is cheap to buy and easy to get to run the index. But most are factored too high...

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Anything to reduce cost and bring new blood into class racing, I welcome, what can i do to help this ball rolling forward

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

The quota is full with 4 grade points. They want less stockers not more. Top dragster is much more fan appealing. Just watch the stands empty when they call Stock.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Bless your heart.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Me, for 1

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Daran, There are more independent S/SS events all the time . They still use the NHRA specs and horsepowers.
The guys are still going to be members and comp numbers users, in most cases.

That is, unless they don't care about memberships anymore either.
Are they relishing in de-evolution then? Who knows?

Maybe Devo was right. LOL

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Honestly, from the perspective of someone on the outside looking in, Most current racers in the bracket classes don't understand class racing AT ALL. I was surprised when I asked questions about S/SS how many racers couldn't tell me the first thing about them. Now the people that do run the class, well they aren't talking either because they aren't giving away any secrets. Case in point, I have a 2005 GTO I could run as an 04 and probably be moderately competitive, now there isn't many of these out there but first on the agenda would be a solid axle swap, when I contacted people involved with the current cars in the class I got vague answers and a "no pictures" reply. Now I get it for sure, but it sure makes me think a S/G car might be looking good at this point. Also... and this is a big one, completely take away the cost of the car and look at the cost to get there, race, then get home plus the time off work, let alone the countless hours to hone the combo, I can easily see how these classes would be unobtainable to most.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Did you come from another class Dave or did you jump right in the stock pool?

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

I have a few photos that I will gladly share. PM me an email address.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Done. Thanks so much.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

This sounds like a great idea to me.

I've wondered why a lot of 2-barrel BOP engines are not raced. When I look up the specs, it appears that some of these 2-barrel engines are only rated maybe 40hp less than a very similar engine which can use an 800cfm Q-jet.

So, that brings up a question which should be in line with this thread. For most GM carb engines, 350 cubes & bigger, aprox how much less power is possible when only a 2-barrel is allowed ?

It appears to me that a 2-barrel would be the limiting factor, whereas an 800 Q-jet would not pose a limit at all, since there are lots of 9 & 10 sec cars, using 750 & 800 Q-jets.

So, considering this, what would be a good number to begin with, for most GM BOP 2-bl engines, that are not being raced ? Or, to put it another way, how much less should the initial factor be, as compared to a very similar 4-barrel engine ?

Since I'm a Pontiac guy, I'll just use a '76 Pontiac 350 as an example. I just looked it up on the Class Racer Info site. The 2-barrel version is factored at 220hp. The 4-barrel version is factored at 260hp. I've seen the 4-bl version in a competitive car. Have never seen the 2-bl version. So, aprox how low would the factor have to be, to make the 2-bl version competitive, or at least run a safe amount under the index ? I'm assuming a properly built & tuned car.

http://www.classracerinfo.com/Engine...3&MAKE=Pontiac

http://www.classracerinfo.com/Engine...4&MAKE=Pontiac

If this post is out of order for this thread, please delete it.

Thanks !

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Interesting discussion if you are continually trying to find a "new" Dime rocket. I am not sure how creating more low hp rated combinations increases participation except experienced guys can keep qualifying #1 with more and more un heard of combinations. trucks, turbo vans etc.
If the plan is to lower costs to attract new blood increase the restrictions on the Motors. Create a sealed motor class. Limit the amount it takes to create a base line can which can be run in Stock or SS.
Allow pure stock cars in eliminator would be quicker way to increase participation.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Dick, it's not just the next "Dime Rocket. Stock Eliminator, whether we like it or not, is by and large a Nostalgia class today. What harm is there in dropping the HP factors on ALL of the older combos (think what NHRA did for the 383s and 426s) so that if somebody wants to build a 389 tri-carb GTO or Olds or 348/409 Chevy they can and at least be somewhat competitive?

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Oldskool asked: So, that brings up a question which should be in line with this thread. For most GM carb engines, 350 cubes & bigger, aprox how much less power is possible when only a 2-barrel is allowed ?
Q-jet to a 2GC was -.5 or so, for me


I wish they would give Ray Whitney some HP help
1962 Chevy wagon 409/425 4 speed, struggles to run the index in G/S
Everybody loves the car, and what would it hurt?


Mike A114
P/SA

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

If you want information on stock combinations go to a division or national meet and spend some time with the people who run your combination. I think you will be surprised at how much they are willing to help. I remember one time I was racing at a national meet and my Carter fuel pump quit. I caught hell from the guy next to me for not running a Holley. After he helped me put on a spare that he had he told me to run the same thing that the rest of the stockers ran and I would never have to worry about not having parts.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Great info, thanks. Haven't started running class yet, maybe next year.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

I applaud your efforts Billy, Dwight and Mark! I do believe it would bring more affordable,unique and hopefully competitive combinations out of the back corners of barns/shops/garages to the track.

Here in the NW there are still good affordable 70's-80's cars that pop up regularly for sale. Thanks to Dwight's site its pretty easy to determine how competitive a combination might be.

I have a brother who has always been a bracket racer kicking around the idea of getting into class racing..and my 12yr old son and I are already working on a U/SA starter combination for him..and that 318-2bbl from the late 70's needs all the help it can get! Good thing there's a 4bbl version as an option down the road! lol

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

And I absolulely agree with this for any older combinations to get more of them out to the track..especially 1965 and older!

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

I run a 67 Camaro with a 302 engine, which is rated at 290 h.p. From the factory. This engine is now rated at 309 h.p. Some combinations have had a reduction of 63 h.p. And it makes me wonder how on earth can any combo have their factory h.p. Reduced that much. It makes me wonder if some folks in Glendora are smoking crack! I can understand a 10 or 12 h.p. Reduction. But 63 hp! That's a bit much. There are guys that run the 302 combination that actually need a reduction in the 309 h.p. rating. I'd love to have 10 h.p. Taken off my combo. That's never going to happen. When we built the car, we did everything humanly possible to make it weigh as little as possible. I can get below the minimum weight in D/S. I cannot get below the C/S minimum weight to take advantage of any h.p. Reduction should that ever happen. Farmer Desmuke would roll over in his grave if he knew about the B.S. That's going on with N.H.R.A. As far as the factoring system, the 302 is carrying h.p. From Tony Pizzi when he ran a 1968 Camaro back in 1969. I was responsible for a 4 h.p. hit from 2009. That 4 h.p. Hurt. Think about a 63 h.p. Reduction and how much it would help. There is no way taking that much h.p. Off a combo can be justified.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Bracket raced mostly street cars. I did not buy an existing Stocker. I am building it myself.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Gordie, you have a PM.

Rick Thomason
GTOMayhem

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

This is a perfect example of the purpose that this letter will (hopefully) serve! There are hundreds of combos in the guide that haven't been competitive in years or have never been. Why should NHRA overlook these combos?

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

I don't know a fraction of what a lot of guys on here know, but is there a person directly responsible for the class?

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

In 1962 mfgrs were inflating hp numbers to sell cars. No way that engine ever made near the power later 425hp engines make.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Seven Liters (427 cubic inches) and 425 hp was the pinnacle for advertising for several years in the 1960s. Comparing a '63 409-425hp, a '63 Ford 427-425hp, a Pontiac 421-420hp, or a '62 MoPar 413-420hp in their original form to the later Hemis, High Rise Fords, or Chev L72/L88/ZL1, you know that something is just not right with the ratings.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

The 62 409 was actually 409 hp rated.
The 63 was 425, with not much difference in specs, if any.
There's a perfect example for Dwight's previous post .
The 62 has been reduced through the current system, but nowhere near enough.
The single 4 , 380 /365 hp needs about 65 more off it ,with that small carburetor.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Not real computer savy that is why I never log on. I to have raced stock for over 40 years on a very limited budget. Haven't race since 2007 when my son passed. Why not do away with the heads up race except for when the exact same combo is pair. You may get a few more racers that way. I know there are a lot of fast D E F & G combos that I certainly can't compete against. Not wanting to start an argument just want to help e little guys.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

As it stands right now the only heads up races during eliminations are when 2 identical letter combos are paired.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

A few years ago I really tried to get 10% off of I think 1995 or so back, and 5 % off the inbetween motors LT1, LS1 and a couple more, and nothing for 2008 or newer. After getting severely scolded by old car guys for various reasons (my favorite "We will got fast and then get hit with HP") I cancelled that project, and had a couple of beverages. I thought I was trying to help. Many disagreed.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

Jeff, we all know you are a hero.

Re: HP Reduction Request
 

The NHRA Technical Department recently made changes to the Class Guide.

1977 Buick Regal 350 170/287 change to 350 170/270

1977 Chev Chevelle 350 170/287 change to 350 170/270 auto

1977 Chev Chevelle 350 170 270 change to 350 170/275 man

1970 Dodge Challenger 440 390/400 change to 440 390/382

1964 Mopar 330, Savoy 426 425/415 change to 426 425/405

looks like letter is working for some