2011 ahfs

Travis Miller · 11-27-2010, 11:56 AM

I verified this morning that altitude runs shown for 2010 in the total number of Stock and S/S data posted on this forum were NOT refactored back to sea level. The total run data was posted simply to show how many runs were made overall in 2010 for Stock and S/S. Looks like the committee only saw the total run data, which of course was not refactored to sea level.

That means all runs of 1.00, 1.05, 1.10, 1.15, and 1.20 under at an altitude track is included without being refactored. Those runs at altitude tracks cannot be included when talking about the total number of runs of 1.10 under the index. It also excludes altitude runs when talking about how many runs were made by new vs old cars. There were many runs made by old cars of 1.10 under at altitude tracks and are not refactored to sea level.

I therefore stand by my original numbers showing real runs of 1.10 or more under the index and which group (new vs old cars) made those runs.

OF SPECIAL NOTE......I do want to make it very clear in this post that data that went into the actual AHFS for 2010 from altitude tracks concerning any horsepower change WAS correctly refactored to sea level.

Travis Miller

(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed by me on this forum are exactly that, my opinions.)

11-27-2010, 11:56 AM	#11
Travis Miller Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 478 Likes: 1 Liked 276 Times in 27 Posts	Re: 2011 ahfs I verified this morning that altitude runs shown for 2010 in the total number of Stock and S/S data posted on this forum were NOT refactored back to sea level. The total run data was posted simply to show how many runs were made overall in 2010 for Stock and S/S. Looks like the committee only saw the total run data, which of course was not refactored to sea level. That means all runs of 1.00, 1.05, 1.10, 1.15, and 1.20 under at an altitude track is included without being refactored. Those runs at altitude tracks cannot be included when talking about the total number of runs of 1.10 under the index. It also excludes altitude runs when talking about how many runs were made by new vs old cars. There were many runs made by old cars of 1.10 under at altitude tracks and are not refactored to sea level. I therefore stand by my original numbers showing real runs of 1.10 or more under the index and which group (new vs old cars) made those runs. OF SPECIAL NOTE......I do want to make it very clear in this post that data that went into the actual AHFS for 2010 from altitude tracks concerning any horsepower change WAS correctly refactored to sea level. Travis Miller (Disclaimer: Opinions expressed by me on this forum are exactly that, my opinions.) Last edited by Travis Miller; 11-27-2010 at 12:03 PM.