2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes

[Bimbo Jones]

I have only met a few racers that honestly prefer being the slower car all the rest are just racers that say that because they can't afford to be the fastest car. We've had the Xmas tree since the early 60's but until the reaction timer was introduced the slower car didn't know he had done a better job of driving only to be eliminated. Just as the best light's reward comes as a finish line cushion. The worst red light should be grounds for elimination. I'd like to hear some more about all those advantages that the slower cars have other than costs. LOL Maybe the rules haven't changed in the past 45 years but a whole bunch of variables sure have been introduced in that time that these old rules do not take into account.

[GarysZ24]

Originally Posted by Bimbo Jones

I have only met a few racers that honestly prefer being the slower car all the rest are just racers that say that because they can't afford to be the fastest car. We've had the Xmas tree since the early 60's but until the reaction timer was introduced the slower car didn't know he had done a better job of driving only to be eliminated. Just as the best light's reward comes as a finish line cushion. The worst red light should be grounds for elimination. I'd like to hear some more about all those advantages that the slower cars have other than costs. LOL Maybe the rules haven't changed in the past 45 years but a whole bunch of variables sure have been introduced in that time that these old rules do not take into account.

Well said Bimbo Jones, well said..

[Ed Fernandez]

Iwould think of the worst foul rule as drag racing welfare.I don't need it.I think the pressure
of being the first makes me a better racer.Not necessarily a good one ,but a better one than I think I would be.
Why does everybody want to keep changing the rules?We need to change NHRA's
attitude towards enforcing them.The rule book,if followed correctly is pretty damn good as it is.

[Jack Matyas]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

Iwould think of the worst foul rule as drag racing welfare.I don't need it.I think the pressure
of being the first makes me a better racer.Not necessarily a good one ,but a better one than I think I would be.
Why does everybody want to keep changing the rules?We need to change NHRA's
attitude towards enforcing them.The rule book,if followed correctly is pretty damn good as it is.

Ed -- Good thing its Holloween because its downright scary that you and I agree on this ............ leave the Rulebook alone .BTW , Tommy has been telling me lately that his ears are ringing -- now , after reading about your engine exit I understand why .

[Jack McCarthy]

jack matayas... you do remember i had the rule changed to allow 3 speed automatics in 1957 - 1961 full size chevys due to the 3 speed turboglide ... only high HP 348s and 6 cylinders cannot use the 3 speed.

jack mccarthy

why the stupid valve spring rule ?

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by Jack McCarthy

jack matayas... you do remember i had the rule changed to allow 3 speed automatics in 1957 - 1961 full size chevys due to the 3 speed turboglide ... only high HP 348s and 6 cylinders cannot use the 3 speed.

jack mccarthy

why the stupid valve spring rule ?

Speaking of valve springs what's the open/closed specs on the various CJ and DP springs?Seems like someone said once on here that if you limited the open pressure specs then all the exotic stuff you see now would be useless and more parity would result.
If you limit the older combos and the factory specs on the new cars are somewhere near the front end coil spring #s on my car,then you hurt the older combos even more than they are now.Can someone explain this in a rational manner?

[bill dedman]

Ed,

In reference to your comment, "Why does everybody want to keep changing the rules?"

Keep changing the rules? KEEP CHANGING THE RULES???
This rule is FORTY SEVEN YEARS OLD!!! Has never been changed!

At the time it was instituted, there was a similar rule: "First car to 'break out' loses."

I don't know if you were racing back then, but I was.

They (NHRA) figured out how to fix that situation very quickly, and did. They probably would have fixed the first red light rule at the same time, but did not have the necessary software, yet, so they buried it . Over the years, people got used to it. I know I did. It took several hours of thinking about it (after having it explained to me by a guy who was a lot smarter than I am) for me to "get it." That's how buried in tradition, I was, But even ~I~ eventually "got it."

They had buried it by never trying to change the "so-simple-a-cave-man-can -understand-it" FIRST RED LIGHT LOSES in a handicapped race, even though the software to alleviate this obviously unfair situation has been around for years. Why? NHRA is run by a bunch of .....well, lets just say that unless it's going to benefit them, monetarily, they simply have no interest in doing it... It wasn't always that way, but it's been that way for a while.

Would you like to RETURN to the original "First Car to Break Out" system, and keep it, on the same basis that you think this red light business can continue to be swept under the carpet, under the the idiotic rationale of "That's the way it's always been???"

No.... I wouldn't think so. It's the same situation, you know... same concept.

Then, let me get this straight: you want to keep the "worst breakout loses" rule, but defy logic by NOT changing to a worst red light rule...

Explain the logic of that one for the folks, if you will, please. I know you will..... oh yes, you will!!!! It will be an explanation devoid of logic because there's only one way you operate in a scenario like this; kill the messenger! Personal attacks, snide comments about the person who disagrees with you and anything pejorative or derogatory that you think will supplant logic and an overview of sportsmanship or fairness, but that's your way of fighting the issue, if there's "no way out."

And, there's not....

I'm waiting.