2011 ahfs

[Kent Hanley]

From what we have heard NHRA is reviewing the altitude adjusted indexes and we should know more shortly. As for the survey I know there we several including one I took through the staging lanes at the D1 LDRS Atco fall race.

Reminder the SRAC reps represent all racers including the racers that run the new cars. (No I don’t own one)

I think some racers are asking why wont NHRA single out the new Fords and Chryslers and put them into their own class??

I say some because there are those that based upon the NHRA rules went out and spent a lot of money on one of these new combinations.
Therefore their argument is, “why penalize me when I was just following the rules.” Which makes sense.

My PERSONAL guess is that:
1. How would you write the rule since some are carbureted, some are super charged ECT it’s not like the FI cars when they hit the track.

2. Is it fair to the racers who went out and spent the money on a new car based upon the existing rules?

3. Ford and Chrysler are 2 great manufactures who are investing lots of money in to our sport. Their investment is much more than in Stock and Super Stock. They sponsor cars and teams in TF, Funny Car and Pro Stock.
As we know fans come to see the Pros and with out these manufacture involvement I just wonder what sort of Pro fields we would really have.
So my personal guess is and this has never been said by anyone at NHRA to me but it makes common sense, “why bite the hand that feeds you”.

So instead of singling out a couple combinations (even if you could write a rule that would) modify the current AHFS to aggressively adjust the out of line combinations.

This is my opinion and I know this could get the entire keyboard racers all fired up and I don’t plan on debating it online.


Kent

[Chad Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Kent Hanley

From what we have heard NHRA is reviewing the altitude adjusted indexes and we should know more shortly. As for the survey I know there we several including one I took through the staging lanes at the D1 LDRS Atco fall race.

Reminder the SRAC reps represent all racers including the racers that run the new cars. (No I don’t own one)

I think some racers are asking why wont NHRA single out the new Fords and Chryslers and put them into their own class??

I say some because there are those that based upon the NHRA rules went out and spent a lot of money on one of these new combinations.
Therefore their argument is, “why penalize me when I was just following the rules.” Which makes sense.

My PERSONAL guess is that:
1. How would you write the rule since some are carbureted, some are super charged ECT it’s not like the FI cars when they hit the track.

2. Is it fair to the racers who went out and spent the money on a new car based upon the existing rules?

3. Ford and Chrysler are 2 great manufactures who are investing lots of money in to our sport. Their investment is much more than in Stock and Super Stock. They sponsor cars and teams in TF, Funny Car and Pro Stock.
As we know fans come to see the Pros and with out these manufacture involvement I just wonder what sort of Pro fields we would really have.
So my personal guess is and this has never been said by anyone at NHRA to me but it makes common sense, “why bite the hand that feeds you”.

So instead of singling out a couple combinations (even if you could write a rule that would) modify the current AHFS to aggressively adjust the out of line combinations.

This is my opinion and I know this could get the entire keyboard racers all fired up and I don’t plan on debating it online.


Kent

the problem with any AHFS system is that there is a way around it for the most part. If you have a combo that will run 1.50 under, and you back it down to run .99 under ( by whatever means you chose you avoid the hits. Then you step it up just enough to win heads up rounds, and the hits will come much slower. Also remember that it takes 2 fast passes to trigger, not just one.

[Bob Pagano]

2. Is it fair to the racers who went out and spent the money on a new car based upon the existing rules?

Is it fair to all the cars that have 50-60-70 thou in their combo's Bad choice of words....Put them ALL in FX and in one year they will be ready for whereever.

Thanks Mike and Kent. With all the latest engine combos from Ford and Mopar being submitted to stock and superstock it will be a while before things get back to the norm. Talk about a runaway train.

[Craig Couris]

Unless there is something here I do not understand, where is the incentive to improve your combination? I believe this is going to tear the very fabric that defines the Eliminator.

[Wade_Owens]

Originally Posted by Craig Couris

Unless there is something here I do not understand, where is the incentive to improve your combination? I believe this is going to tear the very fabric that defines the Eliminator.

Craig is absolutely right. There is much more of this than meets the eye. Where the hell is my incentive to buy 2 new cams and dyno? Why on earth would I call A-1 and say, "build me a new state of the art converter?" And why do I call my engine machinest and say "lets try that far fetched hone job and ring combo to see if its worth a couple?" Why do I call Hole-Shot and buy some new lighter weight wheels? You tell me why I should be proud of running my car in NHRA Stock Eliminator and slowing it down to keep from getting kicked in the nuts by the AHFS and wasting my already spent money?

So, the people supporting us, the contingency companies and so forth are going to see a drop in people buying "improvements". Why in the hell would they consider signing up again for class/win contingency sponsors?


Somebody please explain?

Wade O

[Craig Couris]

Wade,

Thanks for seeing this as I do. The very first thing I did after reading the proposal is figure how fast I could go before being dinged. I've been working on the Corvette getting it ready to move from AA to A and now I must leave it in AA to avoid getting it hit hard. Same with the Oldsmobile. We've been getting our brains beat in for twenty years with this combination and now I have to slow it down?

No one will want to set a record and no one will want to run it out the back door to win a heads up race (with the exception of the underfactored new cars) because you will win the battle but lose the war. NHRA will not have to do away with heads up runs- we will do it for them.

Someone please tell me I'm wrong.

[SS Engine Guy]

Wade, you just explained it. No intrest or reward for improvement. Very valid points that you posted. No system that can be manipulated by competitors will ever bring the desired effect. That being a closely correct hp factor. Or what some may call a level playing field.
This isn't rocket science. If a car can go 'X' fast at a very low mph then something is wrong. The answers are: Illegal parts or improper factor. Hell I still can't understand why a combo isn't subjected to a thorough tech inspection (complete teardown) before hp can be added. If I were you dp/ford owners I would be wondering about that as much as anything. Especially since those combos are relatively new technology.
This, to me, is still racing and that means making your combo as fast as possible under a set of clearly defined rules. We need to encourage racers to improve their combos under existing rules. Not change the rules everytime someone gets caught. This is one of the things that keep specialty manufacturers in business and able to post contingency.
Lastly, as said before, any system that can be easily manipulated by participants won't work not now or ever. Case in point, I just finished, last week, disassembly of a engine that got several hits on that particular combo and it wouldn't pass tech by a mile. Does that hurt anybodys feelings? It hurt 2 of my customers that run that combo.

[B Aceves]

Originally Posted by A56

I see many of us are on the same page as far as not being able to run our cars out, and in the future will have no need to upgrade or update our combinations if our limit is 1.0 or a strike at all NHRA races. Now the problem is how de we fix this situation. I personally try not to ever get involved with situations like this as it can end in arguments from conflicting interests. There are many sides to this coin but the simple fact is that we will never be able to run our cars all out, and that bothers me a lot as ive said over and over again in many different ways. To many racers it just dosent make any difference, but to us who treat Stock Eliminator as a Performance based class and enjoy qualifying at the top of the ladder have our hands tied.
I for one did not know that there would be a new AHFS rule, didnt know of any petitions, didnt know that my thoughts would have counted for anything.
To us racers that dont want this unrealistic change is there anything we can do about it or are we to late to the fight? If anyone knows who to contact, who to talk to and how we can be actually heard please say so.

Mark Lelchook
#704 E/SA

Mark, Guess I dont need that new set of Headers we talked about to catch your A-s now,
What we need is Manufactures such as yourself to get involved in this BS to be heard and
have input, To many times I have heard alot of talk at the track but see no results when it comes to the fight so to speak, And the petetion was being passed around at Bakersfield.

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by Craig Couris

Unless there is something here I do not understand, where is the incentive to improve your combination? I believe this is going to tear the very fabric that defines the Eliminator.

I don't think the "perks" that GM threw at Glendora were as substantial as they are with the current manufacturers to get the favorable HP figures.That being said,is it any wonder they won't put them in their own class.
Only speculation on my part.