|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ramsey, MN
Posts: 112
Likes: 95
Liked 73 Times in 18 Posts
|
![]()
My .02
![]() The .25 offset from natural FSS is too strong to begin with. Example - FSS/G is an 8# class, the index is 10.25. FGT/A in 2016 is an 8# class. Its index is 10.00. I realize there is some aerodynamic advantage to a smaller car, but I challenge anybody to take that same engine and weight combo to whatever body they wish, and gain .25 of a second. So, the new 2017 FGT indexes keep the 8# class at the same index at the .25 offset, but then take it to something that I cannot relate to common sense at all. The worst example is FGT/A - it is a 6# class now posted at an 8.8 index. The exact same engine specs in a "natural" FSS/C car (6# class also) has an index of 9.65. I believe if you took that same engine and weight combo and put it into a dragster chassis, there is no way you could pick up the .85 of the difference in index. While I do not agree, nor can mathematically justify the .25 offset, I believe it is a complete misinterpretation of the capability of the different bodies to think more can be achieved by just changing bodies. The FGT/A to C is the major problem in the index's posted, but that's assuming that in the FGT/D on down classes you can pickup .25 going from a COPO body to a 3rd gen camaro body with the engine and weight staying the same. Just my thoughts... And I am completely aware that the tech guys get paid squat for what they do, and put up with us racers as a bonus. And now in 2017 it seems like there may be less guys...
__________________
superstock5150@gmail.com |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|