HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock
Register Photo Gallery FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-03-2017, 09:11 PM   #1
Jeff Teuton
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houma, LA
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 2
Liked 325 Times in 50 Posts
Default A little help from those smarter than me

As you all know, I am a common man and not the top bulb in the tree. I have been looking at FSS/A and FGT/A on the new format. Now from what I have been told, FSS//A is a 5 lb per hp class and FGT/A is 6 lb per hp class. Now from simple reading I have observed that both have an 8.80 index. Not being able to reconcile these, I appeal to my fellow racers on Class Racer for help. So help me here; a new Copo with say 450 hp might run FSS/A, but the same motor in a 69 Camaro at the same weight might run FGT/A at one lb per hp heavier, but both have an 8.80 index. If my thinking is correct (always suspect) the old car in qualifying has to run 450 lbs heavier than the new car? Someone tell me what I am missing here.
__________________
Jeff Teuton 4022 STK
Jeff Teuton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2017, 10:27 PM   #2
J DeForrest
Member
 
J DeForrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ramsey, MN
Posts: 112
Likes: 95
Liked 73 Times in 18 Posts
Arrow Re: A little help from those smarter than me

Mr Jeff, you are a funny guy, and also correct. Laid out below shows the problem is strongest @ 6#/hp class.


6.0# FSS/C 9.65 & FGT/A 8.80 = .85 Difference in index @ same race weight

6.5# FSS/D 9.90 & FGT/B 9.20 = .70

7.0# FSS/E 10.05 & FGT/C 9.55 = .50

7.5# FSS/F 10.20 & FGT/D 9.90 = .30

8.0# FSS/G 10.25 & FGT/E 10.00 = .25

The difference in FGT is crazy strong. For those who are not understanding or aware: The numbers above are basically a penalty for switching a motor into a different body with the same race weight. Now, I have switched the same drivetrain from a 3rd gen Camaro into a 05 Cavalier, and I believe it is .08 to .10 better. Unless you are switching from a 60's full size wagon, I do not see how it is possible to gain more than .15 by just switching bodies given the same weight.

Jeff had shown the problem from a weight perspective, and I have it in an index perspective. But anyway you look at it, it's not right.

Hopefully someone @ NHRA will see that there is a problem/mistake here, and fix it.
__________________
superstock5150@gmail.com
J DeForrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2017, 10:56 PM   #3
SStockDart
VIP Member
 
SStockDart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Arizona, Texan forever
Posts: 1,176
Likes: 878
Liked 574 Times in 212 Posts
Default Re: A little help from those smarter than me

Jeff, you aren't missing anything. By bringing it up here, I expect changes will be made.

In NHRA's defense, so many combinations and car bodies. Probably requires 3 full time people at a time when all of us are trying to minimize expenses.
__________________
Gary Hansen - SS/FA 4911, B/SA 4911
SStockDart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2017, 11:15 PM   #4
MikeMoller
Senior Member
 
MikeMoller's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Raleigh NC
Posts: 637
Likes: 27
Liked 254 Times in 78 Posts
Default Re: A little help from those smarter than me

Could it be they want to discourage folks from putting the new engines in older cars??
__________________
Mike Moller
NHRA 203 Q-R-T/SA
MikeMoller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2017, 08:01 PM   #5
Jeff Teuton
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houma, LA
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 2
Liked 325 Times in 50 Posts
Default Re: A little help from those smarter than me

I know from past years when F/GT etc was established and NHRA added 23 new SS classes bringing the total to 109 classes, NHRA used stick indexes to effect the move from GT to FGT and I got caught in a .25 change in index. I can't really tell but maybe someone could look at the indexes in the Stick classes in relation to the new classes in F/GT. The purpose was to accommodate new larger motors in other than stock bodies ( a 2010 426 in a 68 Hemi Cuda). It appears the index does not match the new classes 6.00 to 7.49. What do you think?
__________________
Jeff Teuton 4022 STK
Jeff Teuton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 10:14 AM   #6
Hagen Gary
Live Reporter
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Cajun country
Posts: 339
Likes: 51
Liked 34 Times in 10 Posts
Default Re: A little help from those smarter than me

Seems like they could just lose the FGT classes all together.
All factory motors can run in the FSS classes and keep those indexes.
Old cars have nothing to do with this. You can run a new factory car in FGT. Just claim 1 year difference. It happens all the time

Last edited by Hagen Gary; 01-05-2017 at 10:17 AM.
Hagen Gary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 02:55 PM   #7
SS3718
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 129
Likes: 5
Liked 27 Times in 14 Posts
Default Re: A little help from those smarter than me

The easiest solution is to do away with the FGT classes and put us back into regular GT. Then allow the AHFS to take care of HP factors in the same manner that it does with the traditional SS/GT cars. If my memory is correct, there were some very fast traditional SS/GT cars at the 2016 U.S. Nationals.

Nick
SS3718 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 05:28 PM   #8
Hagen Gary
Live Reporter
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Cajun country
Posts: 339
Likes: 51
Liked 34 Times in 10 Posts
Default Re: A little help from those smarter than me

I would like it better if they got rid of the GT classes altogether. Then you would have superstock and factory superstock. It would get rid of Half the classes, and allow NHRA to keep the factory cars at the top of the qualifying ladder. GT classes are outdated. It was intended for newer body style's with older motor combinations. They got rid of the 1980 and older rule years ago. Why do we even have GT classes?
Hagen Gary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 07:04 PM   #9
Dylan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thumbs up Re: A little help from those smarter than me

good
Dylan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2017, 09:14 AM   #10
Mike Pearson
VIP Member
 
Mike Pearson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,443
Likes: 613
Liked 1,916 Times in 574 Posts
Default Re: A little help from those smarter than me

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hagen Gary View Post
I would like it better if they got rid of the GT classes altogether. Then you would have superstock and factory superstock. It would get rid of Half the classes, and allow NHRA to keep the factory cars at the top of the qualifying ladder. GT classes are outdated. It was intended for newer body style's with older motor combinations. They got rid of the 1980 and older rule years ago. Why do we even have GT classes?
The difference between SS and GT is a traditional SS car is restricted to run one of the original accepted engine combinations for that make and model. You can run an older car in GT now with a newer engine combo or a newer car with an older engine combo. If you eliminated GT then the newer combos would have to run only the engines that are in the guide for that year and model.
__________________
Mike Pearson 2485 SS
Mike Pearson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.