Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! - Page 9

frank v · 09-17-2010, 08:00 AM

Gary ,its not the car , its the driver!!!!!!!!!!! lol

Li'l Rick Pennington · 09-17-2010, 10:03 AM

Leaving the Index alone is fine with me.

Would like to race on a .400 tree, instead of the .370.

Would like to see the Scotty rule taken out.

I like the double race weekend format, so I would be infavor of that as well.

Li'l Rick
Division 2
S/G S/ST P270

GaryGoFast · 09-17-2010, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank v

Gary ,its not the car , its the driver!!!!!!!!!!! lol

Coming from someone who had to stick it way deep to go double 0 at Cecil this year.

BKSG1198 · 09-18-2010, 10:21 AM

The issue with the .370 or .400 tree has been brought up A LOT in the past 2 years or so. I mean the tracks make it sound like they have to physically go out and change the tree to make the move from .370 to .400 when all they have to do is switch a program in the computer. I help out with 2 East Coast Super Class Associations and we run on a .400 Tree in the Super Gas and are switching over to the .370 Tree in the Super Comp Association for 2011. Now we didn't even know there was a difference in the tree until back in 2007 Lucky came up to us at one of the Association races and was like do you want a .370 or .400 Tree and My Pop and I said "Hunh?". He said they use a .370 Tree in Divisional Races and my Dad was like well there's the reason I can't cut a light this year. I mean in 06 We were red-lighting and double 0's then 07 we were .40's and .50's and switching the 4-link bars, adjusting the shocks, putting new tires on and we couldn't figure out why and still struggle to this day. I know people have come up to us and told us "We won't run the association cause you use a .400 Pro Tree, because we use those races as test and tunes for the Divisionals". We keep the Tree at .400 for Super Street Guys that have the power to run 9.90 but maybe can't hit a .370 Tree, Dave Harvey Sr. Tom Raskowski, Mike Lauria....all these guys have said we won't run if you switch over to a .370 tree and I'd be shocked if we picked up maybe 4 to 5 guys cause we run a .370 Tree. I'd say switch back to a True .400 Tree cause I think we'd draw more cars back into the class and maybe not have 40+ cars at a National Event like this weekend. As far as I'm concerned Angelle "Cry Baby" is retired....let the Pro's have a .370, we want the .400 Tree Back!

Chris Williams · 09-18-2010, 12:38 PM

Had two long chats with a local track operator here in the NW about the .370 vs. .400 question. He's run several tracks here and is very well respected. I'm interested in people's feedback on his comments.

He said there's no such thing as a ".370" tree. The software doesn't do that, that there's just .400 and .500 -- and, importantly, some compensation amounts (more later). The issue is the LED bulbs, which are proven to be about .030 faster than the incandescents. So a tree set at .400 with LED bulbs will look like an incandescent tree set to .370.

When NHRA shifted to LED bulbs because they are brighter and more reliable in the harsh conditions of the track, they also helped the bike drivers with their red light issues. And for fuel drivers (who are running .060 - .090 lights anyway) it doesn't really effect them.

Of course, as we sportsman know, it sent us for a loop. If you could just barely hit a .050 because your car doesn't react like that, you're now looking at .080s... terrible. And when you're running a Super class where a .010 vs a .020 light is often the difference between winning and losing, .030 is a lifetime.

But the LEDs initially were (still are?) really expensive. So not all tracks could afford them. The NHRA division directors carried around a set of the bulbs for divisional races. And slowly some tracks put them in. To solve the sportsman problem with the faster tree, they put .030 in the compensation factor in the software, resulting in a tree that was as fast as the old .400 incandescent tree.

The operative question is, who has the .030 compensation in the system and who doesn't. Is it in on a class-by-class basis? Is it in for National and Divisional events? How about on your local track on the average weekend race? Should it be?

I'm interested in a "BS" detection on this. Is this what you all understand the issue is? I'm just trying to understand this from a technical level and getting a lot of conflicting info.

Thanks,
Chris

frank v · 09-18-2010, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GaryGoFast

Coming from someone who had to stick it way deep to go double 0 at Cecil this year.

true that

RacingRicki · 09-20-2010, 10:05 PM

Having run the clocks at my local track for 8-9 years, I know for a fact that there is a compensation factor. If I remember correctly, I think that this factor is adjustable on a class by class basis and has nothing to do with the bikes red lighting. I think it is the reason that Chris described.

In any case, the effect is a .370 tree because from what I have seen, the compensation factor is set at 030. Since this can vary from race to race and track to track, it is likely that we will not see it consistently across all racing series (i.e. local programs, nationals, divisionals, etc.).

Add to this that the track has to have the proper version of the compulink software that has this feature. Some tracks my not have the most recent versions so they cannot add in a compensation factor to the tree even if they wanted too.

At the NHRA division level and national level I want to see this compensation factor eliminated. I would think that tracks that host these events will have the LED bulbs by now so we should have consistency at all of those races.

Chris Williams · 09-20-2010, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RacingRicki

In any case, the effect is a .370 tree because from what I have seen, the compensation factor is set at 030. Since this can vary from race to race and track to track, it is likely that we will not see it consistently across all racing series (i.e. local programs, nationals, divisionals, etc.).

Add to this that the track has to have the proper version of the compulink software that has this feature. Some tracks my not have the most recent versions so they cannot add in a compensation factor to the tree even if they wanted too.

At the NHRA division level and national level I want to see this compensation factor eliminated. I would think that tracks that host these events will have the LED bulbs by now so we should have consistency at all of those races.

My guy says a .030 in that field slows the tree down by .030. It would be negative if it was the other way. People with LED bulbs put in a .030 to make it seem like a .400 tree.

Holy cow, could this get any more of a mess? I thought the purpose of a sanctioning body was to straighten out this kind of stuff and make everyone consistent... No?

Rollins_2241 · 09-21-2010, 09:46 AM

There ABSOLUTELY is a software difference among the Pro Tree settings in different classes.

When I run test and tunes at a National Event, NHRA owned track, and ask for a .400 tree, I get a .400 tree. I have reams of time slips grouping lights requiring, say, .050-.060 in my (current car's) delay box.

When I run Divisionals and Nationals at the same track, on the same tree, with the same LED lamps, I have different reams of time slips grouping lights requiring .020-.030 in the same car's delay box. This is true (plus or minus slight rollout differences) at every other track in run in Division 2 as well, from Commerce to SGMP to Orlando (though I have fewer time slips from some of those tracks).

If the issue is software, it would seem to be a cheap fix to restore the .400 tree and bring more cars into competitive situations in each class.

wayne hutton · 09-21-2010, 11:50 AM

I an totally confused?? I have not run sg since the fall of 06, when i wreked the barracuda at reynolds, so this summer I built a new car in a effort to give it another shot.

the new car has all the bells and gagets; tube car,big jeff taylor power,new everything. In the old car we always carried numbers in the box and seemed to be able to adjust at most any track

So we take the new car out on this first outing, expectng we will need to work on chassie, shocks and stuff, and we are 080 on the tree. then we go back to the shop and ghange those things we feel we need to speed up leave times (convertors, shocks, 4 link, travel limters,you name it) now we are .040 to .050. we change everything again and we are still .040 to .050.

Now i know we will not find it in 2 or 3 changes BUT I am now , after reading these post and hours on the pratice tree, if the .370 tree is effecting this out come. I must admit I was not aware of the change to the tree.

when did the tree change happen, was it after the fall of 06 ? Is it different from say columbus to bowling green. I lucked up and cought dave connley first round at bowling green (HA)and kowing I was looking at best at a .040 or so I bumped in deep a was .029 to his .018 and slowed down one or two how much does a 3 or 4 in. deep stage effect et ?

What to do? you would think with 750 lbs/ft tourqe @ 6200 and 6000 chip, big new tires, 430 gear, 6200 convertor, 4 link and strut car, afcos, and whatever it would want to flip over baskwards but it seems to just drive out. what am I missing.

well anyway I guess I am just venting.
thanks for a plce to do it

wayne hutton

09-17-2010, 08:00 AM	#81
frank v Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: ny Posts: 286 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! Gary ,its not the car , its the driver!!!!!!!!!!! lol __________________ s/g 1620

09-17-2010, 10:03 AM	#82
Li'l Rick Pennington Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 30 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! Leaving the Index alone is fine with me. Would like to race on a .400 tree, instead of the .370. Would like to see the Scotty rule taken out. I like the double race weekend format, so I would be infavor of that as well. Li'l Rick Division 2 S/G S/ST P270 Last edited by Li'l Rick Pennington; 09-17-2010 at 10:05 AM.

09-18-2010, 10:21 AM	#84
BKSG1198 VIP Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Back in Vineland, NJ Posts: 2,463 Likes: 83 Liked 986 Times in 301 Posts	Re: Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! The issue with the .370 or .400 tree has been brought up A LOT in the past 2 years or so. I mean the tracks make it sound like they have to physically go out and change the tree to make the move from .370 to .400 when all they have to do is switch a program in the computer. I help out with 2 East Coast Super Class Associations and we run on a .400 Tree in the Super Gas and are switching over to the .370 Tree in the Super Comp Association for 2011. Now we didn't even know there was a difference in the tree until back in 2007 Lucky came up to us at one of the Association races and was like do you want a .370 or .400 Tree and My Pop and I said "Hunh?". He said they use a .370 Tree in Divisional Races and my Dad was like well there's the reason I can't cut a light this year. I mean in 06 We were red-lighting and double 0's then 07 we were .40's and .50's and switching the 4-link bars, adjusting the shocks, putting new tires on and we couldn't figure out why and still struggle to this day. I know people have come up to us and told us "We won't run the association cause you use a .400 Pro Tree, because we use those races as test and tunes for the Divisionals". We keep the Tree at .400 for Super Street Guys that have the power to run 9.90 but maybe can't hit a .370 Tree, Dave Harvey Sr. Tom Raskowski, Mike Lauria....all these guys have said we won't run if you switch over to a .370 tree and I'd be shocked if we picked up maybe 4 to 5 guys cause we run a .370 Tree. I'd say switch back to a True .400 Tree cause I think we'd draw more cars back into the class and maybe not have 40+ cars at a National Event like this weekend. As far as I'm concerned Angelle "Cry Baby" is retired....let the Pro's have a .370, we want the .400 Tree Back!

09-18-2010, 12:38 PM	#85
Chris Williams Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Woodinville, WA Posts: 401 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! Had two long chats with a local track operator here in the NW about the .370 vs. .400 question. He's run several tracks here and is very well respected. I'm interested in people's feedback on his comments. He said there's no such thing as a ".370" tree. The software doesn't do that, that there's just .400 and .500 -- and, importantly, some compensation amounts (more later). The issue is the LED bulbs, which are proven to be about .030 faster than the incandescents. So a tree set at .400 with LED bulbs will look like an incandescent tree set to .370. When NHRA shifted to LED bulbs because they are brighter and more reliable in the harsh conditions of the track, they also helped the bike drivers with their red light issues. And for fuel drivers (who are running .060 - .090 lights anyway) it doesn't really effect them. Of course, as we sportsman know, it sent us for a loop. If you could just barely hit a .050 because your car doesn't react like that, you're now looking at .080s... terrible. And when you're running a Super class where a .010 vs a .020 light is often the difference between winning and losing, .030 is a lifetime. But the LEDs initially were (still are?) really expensive. So not all tracks could afford them. The NHRA division directors carried around a set of the bulbs for divisional races. And slowly some tracks put them in. To solve the sportsman problem with the faster tree, they put .030 in the compensation factor in the software, resulting in a tree that was as fast as the old .400 incandescent tree. The operative question is, who has the .030 compensation in the system and who doesn't. Is it in on a class-by-class basis? Is it in for National and Divisional events? How about on your local track on the average weekend race? Should it be? I'm interested in a "BS" detection on this. Is this what you all understand the issue is? I'm just trying to understand this from a technical level and getting a lot of conflicting info. Thanks, Chris __________________ Chris Williams 6304 SC, TD, ET

09-20-2010, 10:05 PM	#87
RacingRicki Sponsor Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 106 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! Having run the clocks at my local track for 8-9 years, I know for a fact that there is a compensation factor. If I remember correctly, I think that this factor is adjustable on a class by class basis and has nothing to do with the bikes red lighting. I think it is the reason that Chris described. In any case, the effect is a .370 tree because from what I have seen, the compensation factor is set at 030. Since this can vary from race to race and track to track, it is likely that we will not see it consistently across all racing series (i.e. local programs, nationals, divisionals, etc.). Add to this that the track has to have the proper version of the compulink software that has this feature. Some tracks my not have the most recent versions so they cannot add in a compensation factor to the tree even if they wanted too. At the NHRA division level and national level I want to see this compensation factor eliminated. I would think that tracks that host these events will have the LED bulbs by now so we should have consistency at all of those races. __________________ RacingRicki

09-21-2010, 09:46 AM	#89
Rollins_2241 Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Tallahassee, FL Posts: 170 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! There ABSOLUTELY is a software difference among the Pro Tree settings in different classes. When I run test and tunes at a National Event, NHRA owned track, and ask for a .400 tree, I get a .400 tree. I have reams of time slips grouping lights requiring, say, .050-.060 in my (current car's) delay box. When I run Divisionals and Nationals at the same track, on the same tree, with the same LED lamps, I have different reams of time slips grouping lights requiring .020-.030 in the same car's delay box. This is true (plus or minus slight rollout differences) at every other track in run in Division 2 as well, from Commerce to SGMP to Orlando (though I have fewer time slips from some of those tracks). If the issue is software, it would seem to be a cheap fix to restore the .400 tree and bring more cars into competitive situations in each class.

09-21-2010, 11:50 AM	#90
wayne hutton Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 21 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Sportsman Council phone conference Tonight! I an totally confused?? I have not run sg since the fall of 06, when i wreked the barracuda at reynolds, so this summer I built a new car in a effort to give it another shot. the new car has all the bells and gagets; tube car,big jeff taylor power,new everything. In the old car we always carried numbers in the box and seemed to be able to adjust at most any track So we take the new car out on this first outing, expectng we will need to work on chassie, shocks and stuff, and we are 080 on the tree. then we go back to the shop and ghange those things we feel we need to speed up leave times (convertors, shocks, 4 link, travel limters,you name it) now we are .040 to .050. we change everything again and we are still .040 to .050. Now i know we will not find it in 2 or 3 changes BUT I am now , after reading these post and hours on the pratice tree, if the .370 tree is effecting this out come. I must admit I was not aware of the change to the tree. when did the tree change happen, was it after the fall of 06 ? Is it different from say columbus to bowling green. I lucked up and cought dave connley first round at bowling green (HA)and kowing I was looking at best at a .040 or so I bumped in deep a was .029 to his .018 and slowed down one or two how much does a 3 or 4 in. deep stage effect et ? What to do? you would think with 750 lbs/ft tourqe @ 6200 and 6000 chip, big new tires, 430 gear, 6200 convertor, 4 link and strut car, afcos, and whatever it would want to flip over baskwards but it seems to just drive out. what am I missing. well anyway I guess I am just venting. thanks for a plce to do it wayne hutton