Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Hoven
I think there are two ways of looking at this issue. On one hand, yes there are combos that have picked up quite a bit since the last time the rules were changed, whether this be due to aftermarket parts, relaxed tech, etc. However, not all combos really "recovered" in a way since the last index change because they either don't get any aftermarket parts, or they don't benefit from what is the "norm" as far as tech goes nowadays. I personally am not a "player" indexically by any means, mainly limited by funding, but if the indexes were to change, I'm going to keep racing, but I can't say the same for others in a similar situation. To comment on the lack of young stock/ super stock racers, if I'm being honest, if I hadn't been loaned a car for me to put my own drivetrain in, I probably would have just put a C4 in my mustang, and gone bracket racing instead.(Which I've considered doing just for more seat time). I've had conversations with quite a few racers my age, and the consensus is always the same. They can't find the incentive to run stock when the entry fee is more than the typical entry for a 10k bracket race. Unless you're born into a wealthy racing family, or are given the opportunity to drive someone else's "fast" stock/super stock car, lowering the indexes is just going to push what little "new blood" considering building a car away. IMHO, if the indexes were to be lowered, I think NHRA should consider leaving the FWD indexes alone. I find it funny how back in "the day", you were given horsepower arbitrarily if you went fast, but racers just shrugged their shoulders and kept on racing when it happened. Now, everyone complains how much money they have in their engines, and its offensive to think the really fast combos deserve HP. "I've spent tens of thousands on my engine, and have to slow it down so I don't get horsepower, and it's NHRA's fault for not catering to guys like me" Sounds like a story CNN would report.
|
Doug,
Was the last "Index Change" that you are referring to perchance performed in June 2003 by any chance? (As my particular combo was hit w/ 6 HP on that date and no one will take the time or point out why, or who caused it and only answer with " It is a moot subject." And I knowfor a fact that I am the only idiot in history to ever compete with this particular exact slowest combo and while close twice (Winternats 1995 and World Finals 2023), and both at Pomona, CA ran close but never exceeded-.800 under index), all other passes were well below that, some a lot slower at elevation and in bad corrected (D.A.) at altitude tracks. Historically only 6 passes ever anywhere up in the mid range between -.500/-.799 and all at that single track (and always on a crisp cold morning in November or February) Also was a Calif. Smog Car and just flat knows when it goes home (MAP Sensor whisperer?)...and it has historically raced at 32 tracks across the country N.W to N.E., S.W. to S.E. from 1993 to 97 & just 3 this time around so far 2023-24... nowhere near those numbers anywhere else. An issue that soon, I hope to be rectified.
If it was done then willy nilly like this proposal on a whim, suggestion and lobbying effort of some category participants and a simple poll/ committee vote (as is being suggested it appear currently), and not on "actual historical performance-based data of each individual Car/Engine Combo", it explains a whole freaking lot to me.
And it would be no wonder to me why nobody officially wants to answer my repeated questions because they also know I have an HP Reduction letter granted back to 99HP from 110 Feb 1996. I am currently 99 Factory/105 NHRA Factored. (Others in the same class are 100-500 lbs and more less in minimum wt., and they fly too at Indy and elsewhere). We are not talking minute differences here...the struggle is very real and getting quite a bit more expensive.