Re: 65-85 under.
 

There clearly are a lot of combinations that need horsepower added,but I've always thought that somehow they need to take weather conditions into it.Might be hard to hook up,but I saw on Facebook that the air in Bowling Green right now is - 4200 ft.
I don't think it would be right to penalize a lot of the combinations when the air is that good.
But over a second under in Bristol might be worthy of some horsepower.
The mineshaft rule never took into account the weather.
Ironically, it only came into play when the weather was the worst like Indy.

Re: 65-85 under.
 

Great point. I will add - what about the races where Thursday qualifying ends with a "mineshaft bump spot" of -0.80 under. Then on Friday morning, a cold front moves through and now everybody dials 0.20 faster for round 1. So it's not a "mineshaft event" but the immediate conditions are certainly "mineshaft!"

Maybe it doesn't matter because the mineshaft rule is dead but certainly another wrinkle/question mark/downfall/limitation/problem with the AHFS.

Re: 65-85 under.
 

I usually ran about -.45, without lifting or staying in it. I do not have a problem with the new system. If you are that fast (-1.20 or whatever)), you probably need HP. NHRA did not do any favors with their new system. Raising or lowering the indexes does not work, just moves numbers around. NHRA's factoring of cars is an absolute joke, so many adjustments that are so far off. The enhancements given to combinations just adds to the confusion. Racers complaining, just like it was 50 years ago. Same response from 50 years ago, "work on your stuff". Work on your stuff means writing for mercy to NHRA. Did you ever think of all the combinations that were absolute jokes before they were adjusted. This circus never stops, it will be like this ten years from now too. And you know what you are going to do? Just like always, OK.
Cut a light, hit the number, if it's heads up, good luck, go work on your stuff.

I have memories of Mike Senia's Cimmaron, Bob Dennis "banana car" Olds, Bob Shaw's cars, McKay's Buick, and a herd of 302 Fords.


Ron Ortiz
U/SA nitrous 4 sale.

Re: 65-85 under.
 

In reality- what’s the difference?
You ask for HP reduction or you ask parts or you do both.
A few continue building HP and either way it is accepted.
Still wondering what has swayed NHRA in this direction.
Out of the Big Three , who has the most reductions?


Merry Christmas!

Re: 65-85 under.
 

Barry, what has swayed NHRA in this direction? The constant reference
to the fact that the present AHFS is a failure and they decided to try and do something about. If everybody runs all out it works, just like the old system.
Nobody wants HP, so if you think what we did before was sandbagging, wait
till you get a load of this year. Why will we do this? Because everybody wants an advantage. This is racing, we want to win more than the next guy,
qualify better than the next guy, make the best run in our class in the Nation,
bury the record with some serious MPH to show off our HP, and we don't want to give anything back, we want to repeat great runs all of the time. Is this the answer, probably not, but shortening up the window to -65 to -85
under, AND taking away mineshaft, there will be a large amount of HP added to combo's at adjustment time. It is not a favourite with many, but it looks like all we got. Association Races look better all the time. J.R.

Re: 65-85 under.
 

I agree there should be mineshaft exclusions from the AHFS. It should be triggered by weather conditions and not the qualifying order. High barometer at or above 30.20 and below seal level conditions. Any runs during that threshold do not count. Just make sense.

Re: 65-85 under.
 

James,
I don't use drugs so I'm not high. I'm well informed but apparently not as well as you.
Merry Christmas!
Frank

Re: 65-85 under.
 

Billy really let them ruin their combo. It's their fault. What the he## good will that do. Not all of us race a combo that you don't have to worry about heads up runs in the eliminator. Why don't they drop the soft as he## index's by 4 tenths so you can't take a junk yard car and run under the index. It will also help put an end to the sandbagging and have more cars actually run their combo's to their potential. Running under the index is not a God given right. It took my brother and me 2 years before we were able to run the index. And for the few that are just starting out and building a new car. If your going to give up if you don't run under the index your first time out maybe Stock is not the Class for you. Or do what most of the new Stock racers are doing buy a newer $100,000 car or buy a proven older one that someone has spent the time and money on. And if you think there are only a few combo's that stretch the rules you need to look at Indy last year. If you can run 9 tenths under in that crap air you either have a real soft HP or you have built your car to pass what we now have for tear downs. We both know the deal with tec. So as long as you have built your car to pass today's tec I have no problem with the car. The tec we grew up with in the 60's, 70's ,80's are gone. Not the horse but the heard of horses left that barn a long time ago. I know lets go back to the 70's so almost everyone that has a Stocker that is built to pass today's tec should have to junk their car to make you and a very few happy. Go on flame away but you know I'm right . Or yah Merry Christmas to you BP

Re: 65-85 under.
 

Billy aren't you the one that's been on here for years saying that the 396/375 combo is built with all aftermarket parts. With all the parts you talk about there so good you don't have to do anywhere near the amount of work on them that you need to do with the stock factory parts to get them to run that fast. BP

Re: 65-85 under.
 

It's about time that you woke up Barry! Probably dreaming about what NHRA is going to give you next.
Merry Christmas and a Happy and Healthy New Year! See you in the spring!