To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Austin, you and your whole family i consider my friends. I had to do what i had to do because of the NHRA Hawk rule which they came out with over a year and a half ago.(if you dont know what that is, ask your dad). Your dad knew about it last year in November. Him and I talked about it and he had a year to get it straightened out. I only did what i had to do, it was nothing personal. Please dont call me egotistacal as i dont call you names. I consider you a friend.
Thanks, Bill Hawk
(sorry about the typing folks I-70 isnt the smoothest road)

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Bill, first off i do want to apologize for calling you egotistical. I shouldn't have gone that far. However, I do think that what you did was wrong, selfish, and a complete abuse of the system. Getting a combo HP in class or a race is one thing, what you did is completely different! Because of your stunt I have had to completely overhaul my car. And since as you know, I am a college student, that overhaul is difficult to say the least. I would like to stay friends with you, however this event has put a huge damper in our friendship.

P.S. I think you should appoint Lil' Duane to the head of your fan club...he's superb!!:D

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Inquiring minds want to know more...........

If he still considers you a friend I don't think he would mind if you went into further detail just what type of dastardly deed Uncle Bill did????

I know I would like to know what he did that has wronged you and your family. Hey congradulations on making the Dean's List, I know that Medical School can really be tough.

Love Brother....nothing but Love!!!!

Your other Uncle......RJ

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Not that im tring to stir anything up here but if your car is so fast (going -1.42 under so u lifted) why would you have to completely overhaul your car. Take 200 pounds out and go to C, if you were going that far under in D, you can go that far under in C. How did you know you were going that far under in the car at that time? Counter? Maybe? BTW, where do i send the autographed shirt from Mr. Hawk?

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Duane, I was going to stay out of this, but since you insinuated we might be doing something illegal with your reference to a "Counter", I now take it personal. You don't want to get into a battle of wits with Austin concerning racing abilities anyway. It's like the old saying of "Bringing a Knife to a Gun Fight". You being the one with the knife. First off, if you'll read Austin's post on the other topic, you'll see that he said Adam Davis was on a -1.42 under pass, not him. Now as far as calculating ET, at NHRA events we have 1000' times. Most good racers can use that info and tell you what they would have gone. Austin is very good at it. On the run against Adam he said that, with all the changes (weight, oil, etc.), he could go 1.20 under. If it had been a close race, he never would have lifted. It wasn't, so he did. He calculated that he would have gone -1.17 under.

While I'm posting, I'll give you my feelings on what Bill did. First off, I like Bill. We had a great time when he came down here a couple of years ago. Him and Austin developed a great freindship. He's helped us, and I've helped him. Ask him how he got his aluminum heads. However, what he did was wrong in my book. It all started, as Bill said, awhile ago. After getting his combo hit a couple of times, he decided that he needed to move to A instead of B. Now this is probably over your head since a lot racers don't know or understand it, but NHRA decided after giving the Edelbrock heads to the FE's that it would be a "weight only" penalty regarding the HP to shipping weight calculation. In other words, if you had Edlebrock heads, no matter how fast you went, your original weight break didn't change. Therefore Bill was stuck in B. He tried to run A a couple of times, but was corrected on his assumptions by NHRA. I think this is when Bill decided to label it the "Bill Hawk" rule. We indeed discussed this scenario a lot. He informed me of his plans to borrow a set of cast heads, go out and run fast enough to get it hit, then go back to his combo to now run A. I told him at the time that it wasn't right. If he had said that he couldn't compete with his combo anymore and was going to our's then I would have accepted that. That's racing. I campaigned very hard to get NHRA to change their "weight only" ruling on this. Honestly, I did it because I thought it was wrong. Not just because of Bill. I wrote letters and talked extensively with NHRA people, including our Sportsman reps regarding this scenario. One of the things I found out was that most of them didn't know what I was talking about until I explained it. Although at the time the ruling only affected Bill (hence his labeling it the Bill Hawk Rule), it actually effects all FE Fords. Certain NHRA reps, along with the Committee reps agreed with me on this. However, the powers to be at NHRA saw otherwise, and declined to change it, so that was the end of that. I won't get into why they wouldn't, but it had nothing to do with Bill personally no matter what he thinks. So Bill went ahead, borrowed a set of cast heads, and got our combo hit 8 hp so he could put his aluminum head combo into A. Now why would he do that. Is he not dominate in B? Why the determination to run A. In my opinion it's ego!! Funny how after all our conversations, he hasn't once called me or Austin regarding this before or after he did it.

As far as our car, we run on a very limited budget. In fact,if it wasn't for sponsor money to cover expenses, we would already have parked it. However, I'm proud of what Austin has accomplished. We race to win races. We ran our car in D because, for the most part, we could run with all the D cars down here in Div.4, and could beat most of 'em. Now we pick up 8 hp and have to change class so that Bill can run A!! That means gears, suspension, etc. have to be changed. All of Austin's info sheets are worthless now, not to mention the competition in B & C. We'll be at a disadvantage now. Make no mistake, he's not hanging his head. He'll do just fine. I think this whole thing upset him mostly because he liked Bill and cherished his friendship.

I'll say this too, Duane. Your right, we don't spend the money that Bill does on our car. We need it so we can go to the races. However, I don't care how much you spend, you can't BUY sportsmanship or class.


PS. Bill has my address for the shirts just don't send them C.O.D.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Can't we all just get along? DWA

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

I agree with Mickey! Come give Big Austin a hug Lil Duane!!:D Rest your head on my shoulder and tell me all about how you've been hurt:D

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Now that there's sum funny *****! I don't care who ya r.....

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

I'm sorry, I think I'm missing something.

I thought the object of the sport was to race as fast as you can to get to the other end and win...I didn't realize that we were just racing 1000 feet and then coasting so that someone won't get mad because you ran faster than "they" wanted you to.....in other words I thought we were supposed race to the stripe...dare I say...."all out"!

JimR

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Tree Savoy....Apparently you do not know much about sportsman racing in stock eliminator in this era. I am friends with Bill Hawk, but have never had the opportunity to meet the Ford's due to our geographic location in the country. People try to save their combinations at every race. The horsepower system makes that even more difficult. For instance: my father runs a 68 Shelby in A/SA currently. If we go 1.15 under and do not attend another national event we can get horsepower on our combo, because there are no other 68 Shelbys racing in the entire country with our combination to dilute the average. Its pretty disheartening to have to put weight in your car because you made one fast run during the season at a big race and do not attend another race during normal conditions to run average ET's. Especially if you put up a huge run during extreme conditions, but do not have the opportunity to go that fast at any race during the course of the season. Bill had no other choice but to get the combo hit if he wanted to run A/SA. I can see why the Ford's may be upset by what happened, but I can also see Bill's perspective on the situation. I myself am finishing up graduate school like Austin and do not have the funding to travel to races the way I want to. I think this is just part of racing.....and disagreements come with it. Hopefully both parties can make up and still be friends after what has transpired. I'm not trying to play mediator....just trying to state to tree savoy that stock elimator is not balls to the wall first one to the finish line wins type of racing. I don't think it has ever been with the exception of class elimations and heads up races. Besides that we all have to put dials on our windows and go bracket racing 95% of the time

Ryan Horensky
1273 C/SA

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Wow and I thought stock and superstock were performance classes!

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

the funny thing is as soon as bill gets his a%$ kicked in A/SA by one of the new stangs by as much as they want to, he will be back into B/SA where he can dominate..

The hp hit he took will be for?????????????????????

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

I am a huge Stock and Super Stock fan. I have always wanted to race a Stocker and still hope to someday. But man is it disheartening to hear all the talk about saving combinations and racing to 1000ft and such. To me as a fan, that is one of the biggest problems with S/SS today.

Really? I am not old enough to have watched S/SS when they raced off the indexes, but it sure seems like that would have helped keep the performance in a performance class. If you don't think S/SS should be balls to the wall racing, maybe you are in the wrong class.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

The point for many S/SS racers is to build a fast car, because that is the original spirit of the class and many still get a thrill from out running the competition, be it during qualifying, Class Eliminations or during a random heads-up run.

Unfortunately, the AHFS has NOT kept up with the performance of the cars. It's just not that hard to run 1.15 under (just look at Indy qualifying), and NHRA hasn't made the necessary changes to keep up with the fact that today's Stockers are more advanced thanks to aftermarket brakes, radial tires, lightweight clutches, ultra-lightweight automatic transmissions, data-logging, etc. So widespread sandbagging has become the norm because who would spend all that time and money, just to add weight after a few months?

The SRAC tried desperately to make NHRA to understand that this was/is a big problem. We offered solid suggestions to help NHRA make necessary changes to the trigger system so those willing to spend money/time/brainpower/etc. were not wasting their time by improving their cars just to have them factored. We got nowhere! I can't tell you where in the chain of command it made it to, but somewhere our words fell on deaf ears. It's quite sad actually, because moving the triggers would not affect the slower cars, but would reward the fast guys.

I'm not on here to bash NHRA, but there is some work/changes that needs to be made to make racing better. There is talk of dropping the indexes, and i think that is a big joke. All that needs to be done is to modify the triggers a little so there is more incentive to run all out. Additionally, all runs need to count towards the AHFS. Of course more racers would get hit, but the current system doesn't represent the majority of runs.

MOST racers go to 1-3 nationals events a year, but many more Opens and Points races. It's easy to sandbag 1-3 times a year to save your average, but who is going to do that all the time? So, if you want the real data, you have to look at all runs, including factored tracks and mine-shaft weather tracks. Then make educated changes based on a bevy of runs, not one or two killer passes that don't represent the class or combo average.

Evan

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

"MOST racers go to 1-3 nationals events a year, but many more Opens and Points races. It's easy to sandbag 1-3 times a year to save your average, but who is going to do that all the time? So, if you want the real data, you have to look at all runs, including factored tracks and mine-shaft weather tracks. Then make educated changes based on a bevy of runs, not one or two killer passes that don't represent the class or combo average."

AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE !!!!!!!

great post evan, youre hitting the nail on the head with educated changes...
"the AHFS cannot and will not ever work BECAUSE we manipulate the numbers"...
...b/sa class final... hawk... brakelight racing in CLASS...Draining water to miss weight and DQ run...its all over here in black and white every day. we need someone educated in S & SS doing this like provaost / woodro / other retirees ?
and youre so right, no-one in the food part of the chain of command knows enough or cares enough to give a ****... they are way too scared about pro sponsors drying up to be worried about the SHEEP.

jack mccarthy

p.s. did mustangs getting tossed DQ all thier runs ???? save combo a guaranteed hit ??? just wondering

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

LilBlueDeuce,

I think its great that you are a stock/super stock fan. I think our classes could def use more of them. But as far as you telling me that I'm in the wrong class...That may be a pretty ignorant observation being you have never met me. You highlighted a portion of my post that I thought answered itself, but I guess I was wrong. In stock and super stock it is very important to have a fast car in order to be competitive. Most every stock/super stock racer takes pride in making sure they have a fast piece capable of winning heads-up races.We all qualify off an index, have class eliminations, and have occasional heads-up races during eliminations. All performance oriented aspects of stock/super stock racing. I myself have probobly had two heads-up races during eliminations in the entire time I have raced stock. Many racers I'm sure have had far more races of that type.The rest of the time I'm putting a dial on the window. I'm sorry if I confused anyone with the wording in my post. stock/super stock is performance oriented, but is also a bracket race with classed cars aside from qualifying, class, and heads-up races. Hope I cleared up any confusion. I'm def not on here to argue with anyone.

Ryan Horensky
1273 C/SA

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Ryan,

My apologies. I actually overlooked this part of your statement...

..so yes, it is self-explanatory if you actually bother read the whole thing (unlike me). I guess I was upset at reading some other threads about racing to 1000ft in class at Indy to save combos and was reading this thread with blinders on. Maybe I would have a different take on it if I was in their shoes, but man it just kills me to hear about the sandbagging in class.

I just hope that S/SS survives long enough for me to have enough money to jump in. I tried to buy a couple of stockers when I was a little younger and still single (ie. still had money), but the deals didn't work out and I got impatient and ended up with a bracket car.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Li'l Blue Deuce wrote, "I am not old enough to have watched S/SS when they raced off the indexes, but it sure seems like that would have helped keep the performance in a performance class."

Do you mean off "national records"?

They race off indexes NOW, unless you dial down...

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

For those not old enough to recall the old stock eliminator.....you were handicapped off the national records. Class winners and low qualifiers made up the eliminator field. Many racers could run under their records and some cars could really bomb the records but usually did not unless there was an eliminator title on the line Yes records counted during big races for a while if it was a final. Setting a record counted for division points......ET or Mph and seperately at one time. People used to just "nip" their record to get the points. Rules were often different at various tracks and events. Some tracks raced under the rules that you could not go under your record by more than a tenth and win except the final.....or even 2 tenths......All this needed changing and the index system was a real good way to do it. It just has not been upraded with the cars performane of today and the AHFS seems like it was a good attempt at evening out the cars that were way off HP wise.....It appears to be causing the class to look foolish with all the shutting off runs at times at a fast race like Indy just was.


No I don't race a stocker anymore but I am an interested observer and have raced a few stockers over the years...,,,and still enjoy watching the category and the cars......

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Bill...that is what I meant. Thanks for the correction. I am 0 for 2 today.

Rich...thanks for the further explanation of how things used to be. It sounds like even back then, sandbagging was a part of class racing.

I still love watching Stock and SuperStock. It is just more fun watching them run out the back door.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

No problem... I love those '32 Fords.... :)

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Ryan,

Since I'm new to this sport, started in 1964, I'm glad you explained this style of non-racing to me.

All of this is bull s**t!

Drag racing is: run all out, get to the stripe first and it's always been that way. You "new wave" racers think it's all about protecting your HP. NO, it's about running as quick as you can and winning or losing.

When I first started racing it was off National records, you ran as hard as you could in order to re-set that record and you were proud to see your name in the magazine and paint "NHRA Record Holder" on your car.

How proud are you to say that you dumped a race because you were afraid of getting hp?

Real Drag Racers run hard to the finish line, the rest of you are just playing some game.

JimR

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

It's to bad that people with a disagreement don't just call one another and settle the problem in private. I was always told that you don't wash your laundry in public. Politics and games have ruined drag racing for the majority of us.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Balls to the wall,1st. to the strip would be great for stock eliminator,for the 7 or 8 cars that showed up !

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

I have no dog in this hunt. My dogs ain't as good as either. I didn't read the whole string, so bare with me. NHRA considers the 428 with iron heads and aluminum heads as the same instead of two different engines as in the case of the 396 iron/aluminum engines. I think this is wrong and over the last year or maybe longer I have partitioned NHRA to treat the 428 and others and hopefully when (2057) Mopar gets a replacement head ( now that is my dog) that the combo would be treated the same as the Chevy and not the Fords. That is each combo is it's own engine family. If that were done, Charlie & company as well as Hawk & associates could do what they wanted and wouldn't have to type so much. That is the basic's of the problem; the details take to long without refreshment. But I have a new approach; Now that Ford is the car of choice of NHRA, maybe another letter.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

From what I've been told, maybe 9.40's or .50's.

I would love to see what the AA/ combo would run...juuuuuuust once.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Mike,

Probably 8.90s!

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Mr. Tree Savoy,

Being you have been around since 1964 I'm very glad you have been able to experience heads up type racing. I myself enjoy class eliminations and heads up races. I'm a big fan of Pro Stock and other heads-up classes.If you actually knew me and my family like some others do on this site you would realize that we do race our cars hard. I myself have never dumped at a race to avoid getting a penalty. My father managed to get the steel head cobra jets 5 horsepower back in 2003 because of infractions during extreme conditions at Englishtown during the National Event. I wish we had that 5 horsepower back right now, being we got horsepower with weather conditions so good that we haven't seen them since that race. I would love to know what type of stock/super stock car you have raced? If you were a true stock/super stock racer I don't think you would be calling our form of racing total BS. Our horsepower system isn't perfect, that's for sure. But combinations also cannot be factored out of existence like they once were by the swipe of a pen.I do not recall the class every being a first one to the finish line wins type of class with the execption of class eliminations and heads-up races. I think that's why top stock was invented......so the upper class cars could go after each other heads up? Even when guys were racing off the records if they went under the record it was considered a breakout like today's dial in system to the best of my knowledge. If you don't like the fact that stock/super stock is basically a bracket race aside from heads-up runs and qualifying.....there's nothing written in stone that says you have to watch these classes race at all. If you wanna talk about this just send me an email at ryanhorensky@yahoo.com or send me a personal message on here and I'd be glad to talk to you about what's pissing you off about our class and form of racing.

Ryan Horensky
1273 C/SA

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Well stated Ryan. I love those who bash S/SS racing and say the "old days" was so much better. I'm sure it was great when there was only a handful of combinations and the cars were near-stock. But we didn't get a chance to experience it and for us younger crowd, racing is different. Times were simpler in the '60s, but you can't turn back the clock. Today's Stockers are heavily modified and cost a great deal of money and time to prepare and no one in there right mind would ruin a combination for no apparent reason (OK, there are a few exceptions). Nevertheless, many take great pride in having a fast car. You just have to be smart about when you cut it loose.

Drag racing, like all things, has evolved over time and the current format allows for heads-up action and bracket racing. If Stock were all heads-up there would be 10-50 cars out there and it would be nothing but a rich-man's game (as if it's not already one). I'd be willing to bet that all the guys who are against technology (and by that I mean all he advancements over the years in the cam department, valvesprings, EFI, transmissions, brakes, tires, etc.), don't watch a black & white TV, have a daily driver with a carburetor and points, have no microwave oven, Internet, cable TV, etc. In other words, it's OK to enjoy modern technology, as long as it's not on the racetrack, right?

An all-heads-up format would be fine if we raced cars that were 99-percent Stock and had loads of teardowns to ensure legality. Under those circumstances winning or losing came down (and would still) come down to driver skill and minor tuning.

Evan

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Ryan, You were allowed to run 1/10 under back in the day. Jim has been around and dose have a 64 Max Wedge car.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

If you are not smart enough to protect your combination, you were probably not smart enough to make it run fast to begin with.

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

Hey Evan. Hope all is well in sunny Florida. We miss you up here. I know the Brew Crew def misses you. Sorry for the confusion bob. I thought it was set up like today's dial in system. You were allowed to go within a full tenth under? All I know about those days is what I have seen in news clippings from when my dad started racing in the early 70's. Thanks for correcting

Ryan

Re: To: Austin Ford From: Bill Hawk
 

In addition to what Evan stated, I'll add this. Flat out racing is great, but sometimes you have to dump to protect. I'll use the following example, Jim. Say early in the year, you and I have a heads-up run in, say, A/SA. You have a fairly common car (I'll use a '64 Fury Max Wedge as an example). I have a car that is pretty rare (say a '64 or '65 Nascar single 4 Hemi). You and I run Class somewhere early in the year. We both run flat out, both running 10.0's., and you get the win. You have plenty of other cars in your Class to bring the average for your combination down. I don't So, for running flat out, I get hit with HP, you don't, and now I'm further behind. Which can hurt later in the year, especially when it comes time for Indy, trying to win Class or even qualifying. It's this scenario, why racers, when at 1000' they realize they aren't going to win, will dump to protect their HP. It's not just Stock and S/S. David Rampy has done the same thing in Comp with his A/EA Bantam over the years. If he knows he won't get there (or even if he think he will but knows he'll kill the Index if he does), he'll dump, save the Index, to give himself a better chance down the road at winning. After 70+ National Event wins, I'd say Rampy's idea is a pretty smart one. By the way, I've stated twice on here why running off Indexes or National Records will not work with the current system. Hope this helps explain the "games" us "younger generation" has to play.