|
![]() |
#7 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Anaheim Hills, California
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
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!
__________________
Scott Kelley 9.57 @ 146.67 2008 Sport Compact Driver of the Year |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|