Changes 2016

[Dan Walcott]

I sent Bruce an E-Mail a few days ago concerning Stock . EFI vs Carbs


Put your key boards to work!! Now is the time.

[Ed Wright]

EFI vs carbs? Ask Bobby Warren what happened when he had his LT1 on the dyno, and bolted a Quadrajet on it.

[Michael Beard]

I have already e-mailed both Bruce Bacheldor and Dave Mohn regarding the arbitrary safety rules thrust upon the "Factory" cars. Bruce never responded. Dave said he would look into it, after I approached the argument from one of NHRA's highest priorities: "CYA".

What will the insurance company say if there is a SS/JA or GT/HA in an accident that is deemed "safe" by NHRA running 10.00 with a roll bar, -1 jacket/pants, no Competition License, etc., when at the same time they will have 10.50 & slower cars that are required to have a full roll cage, -5 jacket/pants, Competition License, etc. in order to be deemed "safe" by NHRA?

Which is safer, a 3350# car with a 275HP 360 running 10.50's, or a 3350# car with a 275HP 340 running 10.50's? When the safety requirements of a vehicle change based solely upon the decals on the windshield, there's a problem. Safety rules should be based on ET, MPH, and chassis construction, period. If they want to make every car in the country 10.99 & quicker require a full roll cage, -5 suit, Competition License, etc., fine, do that, but the rules should be the same for everyone, not arbitrary based on what year the body or engine is.


Last year, when NHRA created the new Factory classes, they combined sticks & automatics, and utilized the stick index, which resulted in various levels of index hits for automatics. There are a number of Super Stock classes that have sticks & autos combined, in which the autos get a 5% weight break. My question was: if they get a weight break, why don't I? *OR* If I don't, why *do* they? I don't really care which way it is, but I *do* expect consistent application of rules.

The worst thing was that despite numerous back-and-forth e-mails, NHRA absolutely ignored the question entirely -- not only refused to address it with so much as a "no comment" or "because I said so", but refused to acknowledge that the question had even been *asked*! Absolutely staggering.

[Dwight Southerland]

Michael, as my Dad always sarcastically told me and my brothers, "Don't let common sense and good judgment get in the way of what you want to do."

[denbreeden]

Last year I wrote several emails to NHRA about the new Super Stock classes combining auto and sticks and giving the automatics a hit on the index. I did get a couple of responses that they were looking into the situation. The best response I got was that they (NHRA) did not understand why I wasn't a fan of the new classes and indexes! Let's see, you took 2/10's off my index and I keep the same weight.... Yeah I could see were I should be happy about that.


Dennis Breeden

[Jeff Teuton]

Don't preach here. Send it to NHRA. Make lots of paper. On the new class issue, we were completely ignored and no one even looked at the results. I wrote a letter about 30 days ago about this and through Reading there was 12% participation in 26% (the new classes). Those numbers don't lie. Needs to go away. Based on a quick calculation from Nitro's latest, there were 105 new cars/engines in the 945 cars that ran in SS. Now go send all that to the NHRA people. Someone find out who is on the S/SS committee and who is on the Competition Committee.

[69stocker]

Who do we email?

[Carl Weisinger]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

I have already e-mailed both Bruce Bacheldor and Dave Mohn regarding the arbitrary safety rules thrust upon the "Factory" cars. Bruce never responded. Dave said he would look into it, after I approached the argument from one of NHRA's highest priorities: "CYA".

What will the insurance company say if there is a SS/JA or GT/HA in an accident that is deemed "safe" by NHRA running 10.00 with a roll bar, -1 jacket/pants, no Competition License, etc., when at the same time they will have 10.50 & slower cars that are required to have a full roll cage, -5 jacket/pants, Competition License, etc. in order to be deemed "safe" by NHRA?

Which is safer, a 3350# car with a 275HP 360 running 10.50's, or a 3350# car with a 275HP 340 running 10.50's? When the safety requirements of a vehicle change based solely upon the decals on the windshield, there's a problem. Safety rules should be based on ET, MPH, and chassis construction, period. If they want to make every car in the country 10.99 & quicker require a full roll cage, -5 suit, Competition License, etc., fine, do that, but the rules should be the same for everyone, not arbitrary based on what year the body or engine is.


Last year, when NHRA created the new Factory classes, they combined sticks & automatics, and utilized the stick index, which resulted in various levels of index hits for automatics. There are a number of Super Stock classes that have sticks & autos combined, in which the autos get a 5% weight break. My question was: if they get a weight break, why don't I? *OR* If I don't, why *do* they? I don't really care which way it is, but I *do* expect consistent application of rules.

The worst thing was that despite numerous back-and-forth e-mails, NHRA absolutely ignored the question entirely -- not only refused to address it with so much as a "no comment" or "because I said so", but refused to acknowledge that the question had even been *asked*! Absolutely staggering.

Michael,

NHRA, as far as I know, specifically states that drag racing is a dangerous activity with the possibility of serious injury or even death . (Or something like that). Fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as a safe race car or a safe race track. Some are just less dangerous than others. I feel your pain on the class deals. My 290HP SS/JA car (no rocket ship I might add) falls into the category of not needing all the "stuff", as say the same car with a 275HP Drag Pak engine in the FGT/H class it will run. The 383 engine is out of the car with no plans to freshen it up or upgrade any components (like it would help Ha-ha-ha). I've put my money in the 360 combination. So, there you have it.

Over the years I have "collected" several Super Stock cars and will have a stocker next year too. I can run all of them in IHRA with the car and driver safety equipment they have AND without the hassle of a physical and the possibility that I may be taking a medication that NHRA doesn't like. At this point, I'll have to upgrade car or driver equipment in 3 of my cars and go through the physical/license process to run any of them in NHRA. I like the NHRA people and the racers just fine. I won't quit trying to comply with all they demand. But, if they run me off with rules I can't comply with for one reason or another I will simply have to go somewhere else. Or quit.

PS. Thinking about putting mufflers on my FGT/H car. What kind are you running on yours. (Not really. This part was strictly to blow smoke at Mark Tishken)

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by Carl Weisinger

NHRA, as far as I know, specifically states that drag racing is a dangerous activity with the possibility of serious injury or even death . (Or something like that). Fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as a safe race car or a safe race track.

I'm well aware of that, which is why I put "safe" in quotes every time. I am referring to a vehicle meeting the level of safety requirements prescribed by NHRA.

Again, the idea that I can go *faster* with a lower safety requirement if it had a different type engine in it is ridiculous. And in Jeff Ross's case, if his 318 was in a production street Challenger body instead of a DragPak Challenger body, the requirements magically change.

Is there a reason people are against having consistent, logical rules?

[Stewart Way]

Can't speak for others but I am not "against having consistent, logical rules".
I was just trying to explain how the ET vs equipment rules were explained to me when I was an NHRA techman. Guess I didn't do a very good job.
I agree they seem illogical but I think it is the easiest way for NHRA to enforce them.
Tech man or starting line/staging people look at the class on the window and know what equipment is needed.
As for the diff in the new classes vs traditional classes and the 318 example you used, I agree, it is illogical as we look at it. My GUESS is that when NHRA came up with the new classes someone took a stab at how fast the fastest car would be in the class and decided if it fell over or under 9.99. Can it be changed, yes. Will it be, ha.
There are other examples in SS of the equipment rules. If someone had an older SS/AA car (there is or was one in Div.ll) it was lumped into SS/AH when the class was made, no big deal until the fast ones started running quicker than 8.50. NHRA came out and said all SS/AH car have to certify to 8.49 which means funny car cage and other changes. If you are running 9.20 you still need to conform. Logical? No but easy to enforce.
Again Michael, I agree with you.