We need a new "instant" trigger!

Mike Carr · 03-26-2009, 11:46 AM

Ok, now I see what you mean, and what you want to do. By "trigger", I thought you were referring to the -1.40 under mark. At 3.25%, an A/SA 427/425 would get hit 14 HP. Bob's car, at 180 HP in U/SA, gets hit only six. Which, on the surface, doesn't seem fair. Yet, the the U/SA gets more weight added (120 pounds vs the A/SA's 112 pounds). At 4%, it would be 18 HP and 144 pounds in A/SA and 8 HP and 160 pounds in U/SA. 5% is 22 HP and 176 pounds in A, 9 HP and 180 pounds in U. I suppose if one were to want to increase the rate at which a combination receives HP, they would go for a higher percentage (4 or 5%). Would that be too much or not enough? You might poll 100 racers and get 75-80 different opinions and responses. Maybe we need a poll posted on here to see what other's opinions and thoughts are. ME personally, again, I wouldn't change much. They could always make a small change, maybe up to 3.5% and see what that does. BTW, did you get your book in the mail, Billy?

Billy Nees · 03-26-2009, 11:51 AM

Mike, yes I did and I'm sorry for not thanking you sooner.

Billy Nees · 03-26-2009, 11:53 AM

Mark, you're right but it would help to bring it in line twice as soon without obsoleteing a combo overnight.

Jack Matyas · 03-26-2009, 12:06 PM

Billy-- Using your 7% would be harsh at best -- for example our LS1 Firebird is rated at 364 hp -- 7% would be 25 HP at one shot -- or in C/SA trim-- a 9lb class-- thats 225 lbs at one time -- ouch ! ! ! One fabulous day at Atco or somewhere with good air and your toast -- no thanks ! ! ! You're trying to reinvent the wheel in a day .......

Mark Yacavone · 03-26-2009, 12:10 PM

Maybe I'm taking this thread o/t, but here's some ideas for getting some of the soft hp ratings in line:
(I'm not advocating any of them. Just tossing them out)

Implement the AHFS adjustments 4 times a year.

Take away the "free race " during the data period.

Include altitude tracks in the 1.15 and 1.40 trigger (under the factored index)

Lower the "high side " trigger to 1.30 under.

Trouble is , if you implement all the above, you'll have alot more racers making 1000 ' runs in qualifying, and "bracket racing" in class and heads- up runs.
Not good , if you ever want to build spectator appeal for S/SS

03-26-2009, 11:46 AM	#1
Mike Carr VIP Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Enon Valley PA Posts: 1,650 Likes: 234 Liked 83 Times in 37 Posts	Re: We need a new "instant" trigger! Ok, now I see what you mean, and what you want to do. By "trigger", I thought you were referring to the -1.40 under mark. At 3.25%, an A/SA 427/425 would get hit 14 HP. Bob's car, at 180 HP in U/SA, gets hit only six. Which, on the surface, doesn't seem fair. Yet, the the U/SA gets more weight added (120 pounds vs the A/SA's 112 pounds). At 4%, it would be 18 HP and 144 pounds in A/SA and 8 HP and 160 pounds in U/SA. 5% is 22 HP and 176 pounds in A, 9 HP and 180 pounds in U. I suppose if one were to want to increase the rate at which a combination receives HP, they would go for a higher percentage (4 or 5%). Would that be too much or not enough? You might poll 100 racers and get 75-80 different opinions and responses. Maybe we need a poll posted on here to see what other's opinions and thoughts are. ME personally, again, I wouldn't change much. They could always make a small change, maybe up to 3.5% and see what that does. BTW, did you get your book in the mail, Billy? __________________ Mike Carr, Tri-State S/SS Association President Looking for 2015 S/SS Race Sponsors Contact me if interested buffdaddy_1302@hotmail.com (724) 510-5912

03-26-2009, 11:51 AM	#2
Billy Nees VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: On a hilltop in Pa. Posts: 4,496 Likes: 3,600 Liked 7,768 Times in 1,741 Posts	Re: We need a new "instant" trigger! Mike, yes I did and I'm sorry for not thanking you sooner. __________________ Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS I'm not spending 100K to win 2K

03-26-2009, 11:53 AM	#3
Billy Nees VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: On a hilltop in Pa. Posts: 4,496 Likes: 3,600 Liked 7,768 Times in 1,741 Posts	Re: We need a new "instant" trigger! Mark, you're right but it would help to bring it in line twice as soon without obsoleteing a combo overnight. __________________ Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS I'm not spending 100K to win 2K

03-26-2009, 12:06 PM	#4
Jack Matyas Live Reporter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Bethlehem , PA -Christmas City , USA Posts: 4,931 Likes: 407 Liked 2,052 Times in 400 Posts	Re: We need a new "instant" trigger! Billy-- Using your 7% would be harsh at best -- for example our LS1 Firebird is rated at 364 hp -- 7% would be 25 HP at one shot -- or in C/SA trim-- a 9lb class-- thats 225 lbs at one time -- ouch ! ! ! One fabulous day at Atco or somewhere with good air and your toast -- no thanks ! ! ! You're trying to reinvent the wheel in a day ....... __________________ Jack Matyas 1547 FS/C 2015 Camaro COPO # 62- 2012 Camaro Convertible COPO

03-26-2009, 12:10 PM	#5
Mark Yacavone Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Miles From Nowhere Posts: 7,818 Likes: 2,909 Liked 5,126 Times in 1,954 Posts	Re: We need a new "instant" trigger! Maybe I'm taking this thread o/t, but here's some ideas for getting some of the soft hp ratings in line: (I'm not advocating any of them. Just tossing them out) Implement the AHFS adjustments 4 times a year. Take away the "free race " during the data period. Include altitude tracks in the 1.15 and 1.40 trigger (under the factored index) Lower the "high side " trigger to 1.30 under. Trouble is , if you implement all the above, you'll have alot more racers making 1000 ' runs in qualifying, and "bracket racing" in class and heads- up runs. Not good , if you ever want to build spectator appeal for S/SS __________________ "We are lucky we don't get as much Government as we pay for." Will Rogers