CLASS RACER FORUM - Stock Suggestion # 1

CLASS RACER FORUM (https://classracer.com/classforum/index.php)

- Stock and Super Stock (https://classracer.com/classforum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)

- - Stock Suggestion # 1 (https://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=54731)

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

Why not rate every combo on what it actually makes? For every new factory car combo people are angry about there are the same number of equally under rated old combos in the guide, you just can't write a check and pick one up at a dealer. Factor everyone to real horsepower based on mph and weight and move the indexes and weight breaks to fit. This allows new street legal cars to come and play from the dealership. Equality for all.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

And while we're at it. When you run under the record you bought it along with teardown. At least makes the national record pages up to date with current performance. And I agree. Award points for ET, MPH, 1/4 and 1/8th.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by deuces wild (Post 444928)

if alan only worked at nhra we might get somewhere.

i"ll second that......

Great ideas alan.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

Lot's of good stuff in Alan's list. There are other issues to consider, especially when you begin to look 10 years down the road and what is possible for the factories to do. Some sustainable structure needs to be established for them to stay involved.

I would add to his list that NHRA separate administration of Stock/Super Stock from other categories with its own staff. Redirect some of the budget from the cobweb positions into actually managing the categories rather than letting them atrophy into bracket race only mode. They will miss capitalizing on the "glory" aspect of performance-based racing unless they make some adjustments and take control. The factories are quickly leveraging their position in the game to take control away from NHRA.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

I edited the original post, to include suggestions from others.

Most of my original post is taken from my previous posts on the subject matter covered. I simply added more of the information by editing, covering the national records, and the AHFS caveat as well.

Now, I took Dwight's suggestion and ran with it, creating two new positions and a new committee. I think those positions at NHRA should be held by people who have a strong feeling for Stock Eliminator and Super Stock, and are truly interested in what is best for the classes and the racers in it. Now, the committee would obviously require refinements.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

How about somebody on that committee that has a clue about engines, that can look at submitted specs and have a slight clue as to what they mean?

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright (Post 444963)

How about somebody on that committee that has a clue about engines, that can look at submitted specs and have a slight clue as to what they mean?

Ed, my suggestion was that the committee be non binding. But I'm sure that you would agree that making Wesley Roberson one of the administrators that actually took care of Stock Eliminator and Super Stock would take care of your desire to have someone who knows engines taking care of business. You will find that I did just that when I edited the original post. Being an engine builder myself, I know exactly what you mean.

Oh, and as long as they're not competing heads up against anyone else, I'm all for letting the factories beat on each other as much as they like, it's actually a good thing, it will be something for the fans to see and enjoy, and it will encourage the factories to compete. The only caveat there is to make sure that in limited fields they can't shove the rest of the cars out of the field. Never allowing them to be immune from the AHFS should keep that under reasonable control.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 444953)

Some sustainable structure needs to be established for them to stay involved.

I would add to his list that NHRA separate administration of Stock/Super Stock from other categories with its own staff. Redirect some of the budget from the cobweb positions into actually managing the categories rather than letting them atrophy into bracket race only mode. They will miss capitalizing on the "glory" aspect of performance-based racing unless they make some adjustments and take control. .

If someone is running Stock and SS they should also have Pro Stock. All three should be related and sustanable together. NHRA director of Production vehicle racing.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

Talking to Wesley makes me think he has had enough. Anybody knowledgable at all about engines bothering to look up the NHRA specs for most of these new engines are going to think. "Are you KIDDING??"

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1

Quote:

Two administrative positions should be created at NHRA, for the specific purpose of maintaining the health of Stock Eliminator and Super Stock as performance based categories. They should be responsible for forming and overseeing a committee that shall include 5 positions held by racers who shall be elected by their peers for one year terms, 3 positions, each held by a representative from each manufacturer, and 3 positions, each held by representative from a contingency sponsor, selected for a one year term. The committee should meet quarterly, the current SRAC should provide input from the racers directly to the entire committee, the contingency sponsor representatives should provide input from the contingency sponsors as a whole, directly to the entire committee, obviously, the factories have their input via their representatives. My suggestions for those two NHRA positions to start with would be Wesley Roberson, and Len Imbrogno. The complete minutes, as well as any and all votes, (which shall be non binding) of these quarterly meetings shall be published, in their entirety, in the next edition of the National Dragster, and immediately in the Competition section of the NHRA website.

Alan ,I see these committees, using currently active racers ,as a conflict of interest issue.

Let's say, hypothetically speaking of course, a racer submits an issue to the committee:
He has an A/SA car that was qualified at Indy until the class winners are inserted into the final Q sheet, thereby bumping him down to DNQ status.
He suggests changing the long standing format to a straight low qualifier program.
The committee of racers just happens to all have high class cars in the heavily populated classes, who may themselves benefit from such a change one day. There's a good chance of this, because it seems that that's all there is nowadays.
What do you know? The change gets voted in.
This is a strictly hypothetical example , of course.

I would say , at a minimum, the committee should be made up of members who are not actively racing during the current said calendar year.