here is an idea

[Jack McCarthy]

instead of having pat c in the land of oz review all the equipment / horsepower requests we activate some "SENIOR" leaders and get guys like woodro, provoast, and a few others to do the reviews ??

bet some of the retirees would love to stay home and do reviews on the computer...

anything has to be better than this random b.s. going on now... every few months i get a new U/SA of the month to deal with !! cmon 302 fords is like what 800 combo's affected ?

captain jack

p.s. i know it is a stupid thought, and because it makes sense NHRA would never consider it !

[Joe Toller]

Sounds like a good idea.

I gotta admit, I am a little embarassed to be building one of these dreaded Fords, not like I'm gonna ever set U/SA on fire with my little budget and carport, but still, last thing a new guy wants to do is make anyone mad...

[Tony Janes]

This is drag racing people get mad easily. As for the 302 I would not have any guilt feelings about building one, that being said, the caddy is still the best U/SA out there.

[Alan Roehrich]

How about no.

HP by committee becomes a popularity contest and a grudge match all rolled into one.

All that is necessary is to change the points, and the payout, to reward performance, and even the weak AHFS will work well enough.

[james schaechter]

Like award points for National Records... It wouldn't be a huge deal, but maybe a difference maker at times. At least some consideration for performance.

I am sure the VP's at NHRA would never go for it. They still think TS and TD can replace everything from Alky to SuperComp...

[Ed Wright]

A competent, maybe retired, race engine builder reviewing submitted engine specs as submitted might help curb new stuff under rated by as much as 100 hp being approved.

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

How about no.

HP by committee becomes a popularity contest and a grudge match all rolled into one.

All that is necessary is to change the points, and the payout, to reward performance, and even the weak AHFS will work well enough.

I have to agree with Alan on this one.

Let's take an example: We have a SRAC group and it is rare if we even hear or are briefed on the results of their meetings. Everything seems to be clouded by secrecy.

If it was to happen, it needs to be people that are objective, with no hidden agendas or favoritism to any make or racers and that also have common sense. When I talk about common sense, there have been rule changes that although deviate from the OEM specs, are necessary to help keep costs down.

On the other hand, there have been many rules implemented that either favor a make or racer, or do not make sense.

[Dwight Southerland]

It would take people who have high integrity. Some of us have more history than others to draw on, but the human failings are hard to overcome to maintain objectivity and justice. A person's character and beliefs are far more important than age. When you can be influenced by how much somebody puts into the kitty to keep your game going, that is obvious evidence of the lack of ethics that are needed to be the foundation of the sport. I do not think that there is a perfect system, but the one currently in place has major inadequacies.

Alan, while the ideas behind the AHFS seem to meet the criteria for an objective self-adjusting system, it fails to be able to be effective when the playing field gets bombarded to often with ringers that will take years to be adjusted correctly. That's where some individual prudent judgment is better.

[C and W Racing]

I think that is more of a problem between your division rep and the racers in the divisions they may represent. In division 2 our rep sends out an email to everyone that he has an email address , a rundown on what is going on at these meetings and where things stand on differant issues. I have no complaint about what our rep does as far as reporting on the issues at the meetings.
Chuck

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

I have to agree with Alan on this one.

Let's take an example: We have a SRAC group and it is rare if we even hear or are briefed on the results of their meetings. Everything seems to be clouded by secrecy.

If it was to happen, it needs to be people that are objective, with no hidden agendas or favoritism to any make or racers and that also have common sense. When I talk about common sense, there have been rule changes that although deviate from the OEM specs, are necessary to help keep costs down.

On the other hand, there have been many rules implemented that either favor a make or racer, or do not make sense.