Stock Suggestion # 1
 

I propose this on the thought of speeding up the old cars, not slowing down the new cars. I would take 10% HP off all combos and keep the shipping weights where they are. Cars 2007 and older. It appears the LS1 needs something less than 10%. Indexes stay the same. The assumption is AHFS in it's present form or similar is here to stay. I can't download the Class Guides (new computer and over my grade level) or I would post some examples. Maybe some of you could do that for your combo or one you are familiar. How about the 396 cars. There are a bunch of them. A 3400 lb shipping weight car currently @ 400 hp is a B/S car @ 8.5. The same car @ 360 which is less the 10% would have a factor of 9.44 or C/S almost D/S. Somewhere around 2 classes. Just a thought, but I have been proposing this for a few years. Who knows, might find an ear out there.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

There you go Jeff ! Thoughtful and positive ideas! And I don't get choked either! Lol! Now of only the decision makers can have an open discussion......

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Jeff,
You know, what we have here is a "give and take" situation. I have an old dinosaur CC/SA hemi. Therefore, I will "take" your very generous offer of a 10% hp reduction. Now "give" me something in return. I propose a somewhat simpler solution and it will only cost you 2008 and newer cars 20 or so dollars for new vinyl lettering.
You guys can't run heads up with us any longer...you're 4 tenths and 10 mph faster, on the average over the last few years.
What do you think about FX/A for cars in guide at 5.5 to 6.0 with an index of 9.7sec., FX/B for 6.01 to 6.5 index at 9.9, FX/C for 6.51 to 7.0 index at 10.1, FX/D for 7.01 to 7.5 index at 10.3...so on down to FX/G or so?
In other words...don't go away mad from the "old" dinosaur classes...just go away, please <lol>

Chuck

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

If I understand Jeff's math right, you wouldn't be running heads up with cars that you can't compete with anymore. His adjustment in factoring would class you down and you would run heads up against newer cars that you can match up with.

Dale

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Where is the 800 foot mark? That is the new finish line under this scenario. Old cars can't change their tail lights and get a new combo with a fresh factor.

Safe to say a 396/400 Camaro makes north of 600 HP with a Wikle or Tilburg engine and that is about 1.5 Horsepower per cube. This is with a dual plane intake, Holley 780 Vac secondary carb, solid lifter .520 lift cam and heavy internal organs. This combo is factored at roughly 1 HP per cube.

Now advance forward to 2014 and look at the engine design! 2.0 HP per cube easily attainable with this design so how do you justify starting a 396 COPO out at 390 HP when it runs past 800 HP easily?

I think starting out these highly tuned race engine stockers at about 1.25 HP per cubic inch would be a pretty fair place to start.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

I like the 10% hp reduction idea. :)

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Hey Chuck, additionally, to level the playing field, I'd like CNC ported heads, roller cam, an Alum. block, 9 inch ford rear end, any brand automotive Transmission, AND I'll except the factory HP rating of 425hp. - JB-

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Seriously Jeff, we've had this conversation before, your idea is pretty damn good ! -JB-

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

How about just giving the new cars the 50 to 75 (a few engines even more) hp they need to level the playing field? I know what some of the best SS 360" Drag Paks and GM LT1s make from the same engine builder, same dyno. Close to 100 hp difference. Just this past week the 360" got bumped up so the LT1 (which isn't at all over rated) doesn't also have to carry more weight in the same class. Last week I would have to be 40 lbs heavier in SS/JA.

I love Jeff (NOT in THAT way) but he wants everybody else to be shuffled around so the few problem cars don't have to do anything different, or (horrors!) slow down. They are the ones wrong, not everybody else. As long as Ford, MOPAR & GM sponsors races, I would not hold my breath until NHRA made it right.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Instead of reducing HP on over a thousand old cars, why wouldn't you increase HP on the much smaller number of factory cars, which need a HP increase in the first place? They've already appended numerous class weight breaks above A/SA. As you point out, it's not about "slowing them down", but rather classifying them properly.

Dodge blew the roof off the automotive industry by proclaiming the Hellcat made 707HP. It wouldn't have been very marketable to say "This supercharged 6.2L makes 426HP!" If anything, you'd figure they'd want to redo the weight break/classification structure so that ALL cars, both old and new had HP factors that made some semblance of sense to people in the outside world. Do you want to advertise to the public that your factory race car makes 500HP, or 900HP?

As usual, full disclosure: I run a DragPak combo. I think the new cars are great, and are impressive race cars. I simply feel that NHRA could've included them in a way that was realistic and fair, while actually improving their marketing position.

$.02,

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Boys i'm not sure that would answer any of your prays for a long time. The sad truth of the matter is that there's to many people in the back pockets of each others. There are guys out there building STOCKER motors that 2 years ago wouldn't have even talked to you about one let alone build you one. Its a different breed out there most of them have not been in the stock/ super stock pits trying to turn a nickel into a dime. If you have a CNC head and a plastic manifold it should by all rights make about the same power in 10yrs from now. Correct? But with some of the top head porters know doing heads how many revisions to that CNC port do you think there will be? And they are not going to want to do just one set. I guess it will make finding a virgin set of 300hp heads seem cheap. LOL Not sure what the correct answer is. I guess just be happy with what ever you have and do the best you can. It's going to be a long road how ever you look at it. When 4 or 5 of the top 10 are older cars guess they can't say were not trying. LOL

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

So assuming refactioring isn't going to happen since its been proposed many times to no avail and that the FX class suggestion isn't likely to happen, what is another realistic option besides what Jeff suggested?

It seems to me NHRA is pretty much opposed to re-factoring the cars and all of the stock guys and girls(the majority) want all cars factored properly. Those seem to be the extremes of position on the issue.

Given these stances and that we are to a certain extent talking politics, what is the/a middle ground option assuming re-factoring is an extreme for the NHRA?

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Put all the new (2008-up) in their own eliminator race! No AHFS! Let the manufacturers put up their purse (say $5000 each) So let them all run for the $15,000. If them want to run in Stock Eliminator, they use their times and are subjected to the AHFS! Problem solved!!

Patsy

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

The Easy Way Would Be To Make A B C D Stick And Auto If You Are A Old Car Change AN/S BN/S CN/S DN/S Stick And Auto. From D On up Are The Main Classes Affected.And Leave The New Car's Alone. And Let Them Beat Up Each Other. Just Saying This Would Be An Easier Fix. Think About It!!!!!

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Let's not get too far astray on this. Us getting away from a legimate idea is what keeps us from getting anything. You probably can't have it both ways. Speed up one and slow down the other more than likely won't happen. As far as a couple of posts about 'in a couple of years it will be back where we started', welcome aboard the AHFS wagon. Older cars going down about two classes gets most of the newer stuff out of the pre 2008 cars hair. I am not proposing tech changes, allowables, and anything else that does not exist now. And remember, many of these issues pertain to Indy only. There are 23 or so other races. I have other tingling ideas, and that is why this is #1. And I also said this is based on the fact that AHFS or very similar is with us for a while.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Lower the indexes three more tenths.That was such a great idea the first time,might as well do it again.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Makes much more sense to just add hp to the seriously under-rated newer cars. Move them up where they should have been classified to begin with. Nobody that knows anything about engines could look at the engine specs, and think they are anywhere close to correct.

Besides the published specs, the 360" MOPAR Super Stock intake ports outflow the 350" GM LT1 intake ports by 40 cfm! Same cylinder head shop, same flow bench. No telling how far they are ahead of other, older engines with similar hp ratings. That is more than the LT1 ports gained from SS porting! How can we keep up for that?

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Let's really stir this up, and solve several issues at once.

1. Non production street cars (AKA new factory race cars) into their own classes, Factory Stock, designated FS, (or Factory Experimental, AKA FX). This gives the factories a place they can really show their prowess. Classes starting with 5.0 pounds per factored HP, in one pound increments, going up to 10.0 pounds per factored HP, stick and automatic. FS/A thru FS/F, and FS/AA thru FS/FA. Start with the AAA/S index for FS/A, and add 2 tenths to the index for every one pound weight break. AHFS applies.

2. Factory Stock Shootout at every national event, on Saturday, the factories could put up a reasonable purse. Maybe a $5K purse, that's $115K total for a 23 race season, split 3 ways, it costs them less than $40K each for a year of having their cars go head to head in front of the fans 23 Saturdays a year.

3. Production street cars (AKA the old cars) get one pound weight breaks up to 12.0 pounds per factored HP, starting at 7.0 pounds per factored HP, with the 7.0 class being A, and an index of 10.70, for stick and automatic. The 8.0 class, formerly A, becomes B, with an 11 second index, and so on. The first 1/2 pound weight break is 12.5 pounds per factored HP. AHFS applies.

4. Class contested at all national events, and national opens, starting with the second round of qualifying on Friday. Possible sponsorship by some current supporters of class racing, such as Comp Cams and ATI Performance Products, among others.

5. Class pays 10 points per contested round win (includes byes). For national events and LODRS races.

6. Qualifying pays 10 points per position, for positions 1 thru 10. For national events and LODRS races.

7. Qualifying pays $100 per position, for positions 1 thru 5. For national events and LODRS races.

8. Class, and the Factory Shootout, contested at all LODRS races, starting with the first round of qualifying on Saturday for the benefit of the fans and the factories.

9. Heads up races pay double points for a round win, at national events or LODRS races.

10. New production street cars, built after 2005, take 300 pounds off of their factory curb weight, to allow for the removal of emissions and safety equipment not found on early model cars, and have their base (original listed) HP rating (those not already in the guide and adjusted) adjusted to 5% below their factory rating. This is to encourage the factories to also put their new production street cars in the guide to compete in the regular Stock Eliminator classes.

11. Setting a record pays 100 points, once per year/season. Another racer can set the same record, and be awarded points. Some caveats to prevent abuse are necessary. No points awarded for resetting your own record in the same season. Once you have set a record in a year/season, no points will be awarded for setting another record with a different combination.

12. Any run that results in instant HP being added to a combination will result in a full teardown procedure at that event. Any racer refusing to teardown is subject to an immediate suspension of 1 year minimum, and a fine.

This separates the factory race cars from the production street cars, and just as important, showcases the factory race cars, giving the factories the exposure they're looking for. It gives the factories a reason to put their new production street cars in the regular classes, to give "young/new" fans a reason to get involved.

With 5.0 and 6.0 weight breaks, the factory race cars are still considerably faster than the older cars, which will have a 7.0 weight break for their lightest class. In truth, the fast cars in the 7.0 and 8.0 factory race car classes will probably be faster than the traditional production street cars, the indexes will almost certainly be lower, giving them room to let them run. Once again, allowing the factory race cars to be showcased, for the benefit of the fans and the factories.

It also brings performance to the fore front of the class, giving the fans something to see and cheer, and contingency sponsors a reason to come back and pay contingency money.

It makes the AHFS work as intended.

It requires no adjustment of anyone's HP factor by NHRA, and only some adjustments of some indexes.

It has little, if any cost to NHRA, and they get a lot more reasons for paying fans to be in the stands. In fact, with potential sponsorship of the shootout and class eliminations, they stand to make money from the sponsors as well. With a reasonable amount of organization, it should have little effect on the time it takes to run an event.

These same suggestions, with some modifications, could be applied to Super Stock.

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.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

If Alan only worked at Nhra we might get somewhere.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

While we are at it....

reinstate awarding points when records are set

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
 

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
 

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
 

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
 

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.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Mark, that is exactly the reason why I suggested the committee vote be non binding. The committee is merely a collection of representatives from the groups involved, the racers, the sponsors, and the manufacturers.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Well, two things there. Wesley Roberson is an example of the type of person required to do the job, whether Wesley would take it or not. Make it Dave Ley, or Travis Miller if you want. If Wesley was actually allowed to do the job, he might consider taking it, especially if he were able to work with Len Imbrogno, and they were given a reasonable amount of freedom to do what was needed.

In any event, NHRA is not likely to do anything like what we suggest. We're merely posting "what if" scenarios.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

If you think NHRA will even look at a list like that, you are kidding yourself. I am trying to get some idea on lowering the HP for pre 2008 cars. Too many opinions on too many topics by too many people. This stuff on this thread is great reading, but then Mark Twain was too. We might get a couple items done, but a couple hundred items have no appeal to NHRA. I think we need to edit what we can, and not rewrite Tom Sawyer.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Lowering the horsepower on the pre 2008 cars is a joke, and a waste of time. All it does is force all of the pre 2008 cars to constantly sand bag to protect the new lower HP ratings. It's ugly, for the racers, the fans, and the sponsors. The pre 2008 cars will be racing to 800 feet and dropping.

If you are not starting by either separating the factory race cars from the other cars, or at least forcing the HP ratings on the factory race cars to be far closer to being in line with the other cars, as well as never allowing them a pass on the AHFS when they race and qualify with the pre 2008 cars, then you are wasting your time, you will accomplish nothing.

And Jeff, there are twelve items on the list, not a hundred. The majority of them cost NHRA nothing, and have the potential to turn considerable additional profit for NHRA.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

[QUOTE=Alan Roehrich;445032]Lowering the horsepower on the pre 2008 cars is a joke, and a waste of time. QUOTE]

Agreed. Say there are four-hundred different engine combinations in active Stock Eliminator. Why de-rate 375-380 of them rather than fix the 20-25 that are severely wrong?

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

Mike, it isn't even that, although that in itself is a good reason, especially since the majority of the pre 2008 combinations are in line, with the exception of a few hidden gems such as Larry Hill's truck or Paul Wong's truck. It's the factory race cars that are so far out of line.

The problem, as I mentioned above, is the fact that if you take 10% off of the pre 2008 cars, you create a situation where they now have to protect that factor, so every one of those cards will drop at 1000 feet, or sooner. You have all of those cars sand bagging on every pass. Further, the more popular combinations, in the more popular classes, will be right back where they were in 2 years or less.

Let's use our stuff as an example, although Kevin Cradduck may not return to class racing. We have two 69 Camaro race cars, one in Stock Eliminator, one in Super Stock (the car belongs to Scot LaMar). The well known orange car has run with a 427/425 since Pete Biondo drove it back 7-8 years ago. Right now, we have two other choices, the 396/375, which I can replace the current (broken) 427 with relatively easily, and the 427 ZL-1, which I could build at a cost of maybe $15K. So we have 3 combinations, two of which are very popular, and fast. Odds are, those two will return to their current rating quickly, and we're right back where we started.

The lesser known green car, we pretty much have the 396/375 that is in it right now. To run a 427/425, we'd have to rebuild the car, after building a new short block, so we're looking at $30K. To switch to a ZL-1, we're talking $50K at least. To run a 325 or 350 horse 396, I'd have to start with a clean piece of paper under the hood, so we're looking at $20K.

Of course, I can convert both cars to 4 speeds, which would thrill Scot LaMar and Jimmy Bridges I'm sure. For a cost of $7500 each.

In any case, odds are, everything we have would be back to the current HP rating in 1-2 years. In the mean time, I suppose we'd have to refine the art of dropping at 1000 feet.

The thing is, those combinations are decades old, and fairly well factored. Why would they need to be refactored, when they are not the problem?

The most simple, most cost effective, most long term, and cleanest solution is to put the factory race cars in their own classes. It works, it works immediately, and it continues to work for as long as the factories want to keep playing the game.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

[quote=Mike Carr;445034] FYI, according to my database, there are 2944 different engines listed in the classification guide prior to 2008 that have HP factors.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

It blows my mind that people want to re-invent the wheel..........

I'll say it one more time:

Put all of the Factory Shootout type cars into a setting which forces them to race heads up with each other with AHFS in place.......

Why destroy stock?????????????

This is so simple it boggles the mind.....

Self-interest is a running rampant through Stock Eliminator....

Stock was here before the Factory Shootout cars and I only hope that it can survive the Factory Shootout cars and the people that promote them...

Let the Factory Shootout cars race heads up, with AHFS in place and kill each other like what was done to the FI cars...

Am I the only person that sees this???????????????????

Bob

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

I'm pretty sure these new cars were underfactored on purpose by NHRA and the manufacturers. This is not some sort of mistake that they are keen on fixing. I think a lot of upper class stocker guys should give serious consideration to converting their rides to Super Stock trim or even, dare I say it, Super Street.

Re: Stock Suggestion # 1
 

That's good , Bob .. You're right ..simple and obvious solution to that issue.

Only two more problems, easily fixed :

2, No new classes (besides the one in section three.) No new indexes
NO heads up runs anytime, anywhere,between FX and non FX cars for at least five years.

3, ALL FX cars run class (where stock class is run) as FX Combo. Stick and auto combined..
Now you have a Factory showcase where ever class is run .
At the most ,NHRA is out one more trophy .

Simple enough, Jeff?