CLASS RACER FORUM - View Single Post

Rob Wright · 09-13-2018, 08:13 AM

If leveling horsepower would please everyone that's not horribly difficult. A fixed diameter orifice with flow certification (issued by NHRA) installed before the fuel pressure regulator, plus a max spec for fuel pressure, would accomplish that. Not hard.

Each vehicle platform has its own advantages & disadvantages and those would be more difficult to quantify & sort out effective countermeasures to equalize all of them. Regardless, it all needs to be considered since there is more going down the track than "The Motor".

The real lack of parody seems to be each manufacturer's rep's ability to get submissions in (cars and parts) and approved.

One gains submission approvals for new engines, etc. that retro back several production years, favorable HP ratings vs submitted engine specs, blocks with big lifters & purpose made heads, etc.

Another had a similar thing going on until their rep made a career change & left, but they had a pretty good go at gaining submission approval with emails and no sample part reviews.

The third rep seems to be unwilling to make submissions that retro back, or somehow if they are trying their submissions are refused. Also, they seem to be less willing to invest in bespoke parts and instead are using items from their "general use" catalog. This actually makes sense if you're running a business to make money, instead of making heavy investment to create bespoke parts that are not produced in any appreciable volume and therefore are not generally available & cannot be sold at a profit.

When I was involved with this on the OEM side, I suggested that all submissions should be reviewed by NHRA and engineering people from each OEM before they are approved. I also suggested that denial or disapproval from a competitor's OEM must include sound reasoning (technical facts) to support their argument. This way it would be less likely to become an emotionally fueled pitch battle.......Just facts & data.

I also suggested that all new car submissions should be demonstrated on-track with engineering reps from each OEM and NHRA present, at a location of NHRA's choice, before the new car is approved. This would include a review of ECU and vehicle data logger information by all present to avoid having submissions pass through with sandbagging measures like throttle cables set to only open the blades 50% or spark retarded 15°.

I still tend to think this is a good idea, and nobody was ever able to present a sound argument against it.

Back to the retro submissions & parts on the fly for a minute, if a decision was made by NHRA that says there will be no new engines, extensive vehicle modifications, air intakes, etc. accepted for older model year cars that were already submitted and accepted, what should be done with the cars/combinations that are already out there today?

09-13-2018, 08:13 AM	#103
Rob Wright Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Posts: 45 Likes: 2 Liked 21 Times in 7 Posts	Re: Make the Chevrolet Win If leveling horsepower would please everyone that's not horribly difficult. A fixed diameter orifice with flow certification (issued by NHRA) installed before the fuel pressure regulator, plus a max spec for fuel pressure, would accomplish that. Not hard. Each vehicle platform has its own advantages & disadvantages and those would be more difficult to quantify & sort out effective countermeasures to equalize all of them. Regardless, it all needs to be considered since there is more going down the track than "The Motor". The real lack of parody seems to be each manufacturer's rep's ability to get submissions in (cars and parts) and approved. One gains submission approvals for new engines, etc. that retro back several production years, favorable HP ratings vs submitted engine specs, blocks with big lifters & purpose made heads, etc. Another had a similar thing going on until their rep made a career change & left, but they had a pretty good go at gaining submission approval with emails and no sample part reviews. The third rep seems to be unwilling to make submissions that retro back, or somehow if they are trying their submissions are refused. Also, they seem to be less willing to invest in bespoke parts and instead are using items from their "general use" catalog. This actually makes sense if you're running a business to make money, instead of making heavy investment to create bespoke parts that are not produced in any appreciable volume and therefore are not generally available & cannot be sold at a profit. When I was involved with this on the OEM side, I suggested that all submissions should be reviewed by NHRA and engineering people from each OEM before they are approved. I also suggested that denial or disapproval from a competitor's OEM must include sound reasoning (technical facts) to support their argument. This way it would be less likely to become an emotionally fueled pitch battle.......Just facts & data. I also suggested that all new car submissions should be demonstrated on-track with engineering reps from each OEM and NHRA present, at a location of NHRA's choice, before the new car is approved. This would include a review of ECU and vehicle data logger information by all present to avoid having submissions pass through with sandbagging measures like throttle cables set to only open the blades 50% or spark retarded 15°. I still tend to think this is a good idea, and nobody was ever able to present a sound argument against it. Back to the retro submissions & parts on the fly for a minute, if a decision was made by NHRA that says there will be no new engines, extensive vehicle modifications, air intakes, etc. accepted for older model year cars that were already submitted and accepted, what should be done with the cars/combinations that are already out there today?