[Toyotakid]

Originally Posted by cicero819

"if it's not written in the rule book than it's legal" and we all know that you can always push that fine line. I find people who puch the envelope shouldn't be considered cheaters, just explorers.

I so wish this was the case. When the sport compact series went belly up because of monetary reasons in 2007, I knew to stay viable in the NHRA market I had to find a place to race in Super Stock or Comp. I found a couple classes that I could fit into but because my car is unique they referred to page 14 in the rulebook under how to use this rule book, "Unless modification is specifically permitted by this rulebook, it is prohibited." Needless to say it took till 2009 before I had the SS/EX class to run in.

Now after running with you guys for the past year, I don’t think the problem lies with tech, the main issue is with the index system. When really looking at Super Stock class indexes there is no "specific" guideline on base indexes and there is a HUGE inconsistency from one weight break to the next. For example, In the MX classification there are 4 normally aspirated classes.

SS/AX - 8.5 lbs per inch - 9.50 index
SS/BX - 11.0 lbs per inch - 10.55 index
SS/CX - 12.5 lbs per inch - 10.80 index
SS/EX - 11.5 lbs per inch - 10.50 index - Front Drive Only

The difference between AX and BX is 1.05 seconds. If you divide that by 5 (that breaks it down per .5 lb increments) it breaks down to .21 per .5 lbs of weight. The difference between BX and CX is .25. If you break it down the same way the NHRA factor drops to .08 per .5 lbs of weight when it should be the NHRA .21 per .5 lbs for the AX and BX class. Plus, the EX class index is .5 lbs heavier than BX and the index is .05 less! That is the only class anywhere in the rulebook that that happens. When I looked at all Super Stock classes I found many more of these discrepancies.

So long story longer, NHRA needs to come up with indexes that make sense and are on a level playing field for EVERYONE!