Stick vs. Auto index

[SS Engine Guy]

I think if you want to run a stick (which I think is cool) then run a stick or if you think that an auto is more suited to you then run an auto. Enough with the "rule change of the week". If you want to combine them then let the stick have the magnetic release and the auto the full lock up converter. And let both SPEND MORE MONEY.

[Jeff Lee]

Regarding Stock,
First off, I never said "combine classes".
Second, I never suggested a rule change, I suggested parity on the indexes. That's not a rule change.
I really don't know how to make it any easier to understand.

JR brought up SS/JA. Coincedentely I was talking to my SS/J buddy Rob Youngblood tonight. He recently raced and ran the same ET as Don Little in SS/JA. Don Little qualified #1, Youngblood qualified #9. Another racer commented to Youngblood "how can you run the same time and be 8 positions apart?" Youngblood said "because there is a two tenths difference on the index!"
I think that example pretty much sums it up. Two cars both on a 11# weight break and one gets a two tenths advantage by running an automatic trans. Since SS Engine Guy brought up money, tell us how much money Youngblood would have to spend to find the extra 40 HP needed to obtain that #1 qualifying position? I'll betcha you would like that customer!

And yes, I would be all for Superstock (not Stock) allowing a magnetic clutch release to compete against the trans-brakes. The performance of the stick car would not change ANY so there would be no need for allowing lock-up converters. While not offering a performance advantage, the stick cars with a clutch release would be more deadly on the line. And I guess that would frighten those with trans-brakes that have unlimited adjustments quite similar in application to a delay box. And I suppose that's where the "leave the rules alone" mantra starts kicking in!

JR,
I hate to tell you but every run in Nitro Joe's is not neccessarily a legal run down the track. A record is set, authenticated and published by NHRA. And if a racer feels the need to build a vehicle which will run under a record he should be more than happy to prove the validity of his runs.

[Scott Loge]

Are you guys for real?!?! Go by the NHRA records and not take into account where or what the air was? Factored track or non-factored track?!?! These are all factors for all cars. Stick, auto do not matter it is a choice. When i raced I ran G/Sa at Pomona and went 11:19 in F/Sa. Pomona is a good track with great air in the winter. I go to Boise and add 60 pounds to run G/Sa still 40 heavy and run within .oo1 of G/record at 10.99. My car was manhandled in class several times by several cars. These are facts with run slips to prove. !!!!

Get off the box and leave the class alone!!!

[SS Engine Guy]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Since SS Engine Guy brought up money, tell us how much money Youngblood would have to spend to find the extra 40 HP needed to obtain that #1 qualifying position?

Gee I have no idea of how much money someone would have to spend in order to pick up 40 hp. in order to qualify the same in that senario. I guess it depends on how scienced out the car is and how long it has been thrashed. Somewhere between $40.00 and $40,000 in the engine compartment I'm guessing. Chassis would be a little higher. Might be something as simple as the brakes dragging.

[Jeff Lee]

OK, so throw the record runs out with the trash. But I really don't know how to compare performance with any substance. Be that as it may, it all boils down to not seeing one argument made that can support there being any difference in the comparative indexes; other than there are those wanting to protect their advantages. I'm not suggesting an advantage for one group over the other, and am not suggesting a rule change. Just simply suggesting equality.

[Mike Dahl]

We race based on elapsed times and the current records do not show an advantage to the stick cars. In fact, most Super Stock records favor the automatic.

As I see it, the largest advantage the automatic has is the ability to buy or build a proven combination that has been tested and enhanced by many, many more racers and engine builders. When you run a stick, you are almost alone on the island with regards to camshaft, clutch, and tire choices; and yes it's all different.

In short, more advances will be realized with a larger group testing and enhancing a combination. I hope there is no debate with this statement.

To be fair, maybe the stick could run faster than their automatic counterparts. Maybe not. We just need a larger test group to prove it. Until then, let's even them up and see where we are.

A final note... Sometimes an implied consensus is interpreted on these forums based on the volume of posts that support one side of a discussion or another. I would hope that the imbalance of stick vs. auto racers is taken into account.

Mike

[Tom Meyer]

Rick I do not think my car could run with Kips car with his 10 teen somthing. Robin Browns 9.89 run killed the chevy IIs in SS/K there hp is now 241 ves 230 for the autos and 230 in the GT classes so you have to look at the gt runs when comparing to SS/KA. Plus the fact that there was only 3 cars in SS/K. Now as far as alt corected records most of us set them at the tracks we run at. How many cars out east have a 2500 ft tuneup this is the air we run in all the time. Maybe my car is different but I ran a 49 at earlviile and my record is a 52 set at great bend which is corected. Now last week at kearney the air was at 3500 ft at a track that is at 2100 ft. but we did have a tail wind. But untill the cars run a honest door handle to door handle can we start looking at it right. Tom

[Mike Voth]

Tell me how this is even. We use to run GTF. Same index as SS/HA, but the autos got a 140? pound weight advantage. Now we run GTE. Same index as GT/DA. Another weight advantage for the autos. We make as much HP as any 327 in the country, and all things equal, it doesn't always show on the track. We are lacking in the clutch department (see Westcotts Beretta and Grand Am a few years ago), but can't come close to some of the automatic combinations. We could have reset the E record at Denver this year in the 9.50's, but chose not to because it would have been a bogus, corrected number. Then all would say the auto and stick cars are about equal. This is not the case.

You have to look at the norm, not what is above or below it. It is MUCH more difficult to duplicate a stick combination unless the same person builds both cars. Even then it's not a given. Yet there are many similar automatic cars running similar numbers across the board. Also, you can't compare cars on the east coast to cars in the midwest or left coast unless they come together at the same track on the same day. I would love to see a time slip of our car at Atco or Belle Rose or anywhere there might be -200 feet altitude conditions. But that would not at all be close to the norm for our car.

Yes, transmissions and clutches have come a LONG way in the last 10 years, but not in terms of performance as much as longevity and consistancy. The right automatic transmission change and torque converter change can and will net several tenths in performance. The right transmission and clutch change in a stick car is only good for .10-.15, on average.

Even the indexes. Even the car weights. Run this way long enough to build the proper database of information to make a decision on adjustments that might need to be made. But the only thing I guarantee you will see is who has built the BETTER combinations, not who has the ADVANTAGE based on NHRA rules.

Just my 2 cents worth. . .

[Stewart Way]

On the Wescott runs ot .50 and .51 auto vs stick the other interesting thing is the auto was 1.16 60 with the stick 1.25 in the 60. The stick was still .07 behind at the 1/8. If they get the stick to hook, lookout.

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Mike Voth

Tell me how this is even. We use to run GTF. Same index as SS/HA, but the autos got a 140? pound weight advantage. Now we run GTE. Same index as GT/DA. Another weight advantage for the autos. We make as much HP as any 327 in the country, and all things equal, it doesn't always show on the track. We are lacking in the clutch department (see Westcotts Beretta and Grand Am a few years ago), but can't come close to some of the automatic combinations. We could have reset the E record at Denver this year in the 9.50's, but chose not to because it would have been a bogus, corrected number. Then all would say the auto and stick cars are about equal. This is not the case.

You have to look at the norm, not what is above or below it. It is MUCH more difficult to duplicate a stick combination unless the same person builds both cars. Even then it's not a given. Yet there are many similar automatic cars running similar numbers across the board. Also, you can't compare cars on the east coast to cars in the midwest or left coast unless they come together at the same track on the same day. I would love to see a time slip of our car at Atco or Belle Rose or anywhere there might be -200 feet altitude conditions. But that would not at all be close to the norm for our car.

Yes, transmissions and clutches have come a LONG way in the last 10 years, but not in terms of performance as much as longevity and consistancy. The right automatic transmission change and torque converter change can and will net several tenths in performance. The right transmission and clutch change in a stick car is only good for .10-.15, on average.

Even the indexes. Even the car weights. Run this way long enough to build the proper database of information to make a decision on adjustments that might need to be made. But the only thing I guarantee you will see is who has built the BETTER combinations, not who has the ADVANTAGE based on NHRA rules.

Just my 2 cents worth. . .

Very nicely stated. 4000+ views and nobody came up with an argument, good or bad, in keeping the descrepancies on the indexes. I'd settle for a logical explaination...