G/SA Current Record

[Evan Smith]

Jesse,

Setting an NHRA record is still cool, especially if it's your first time. It doesn't carry the same weight as it once did for a few reasons (in my opinion of course):

1. Back in the day guys with the fastest cars (who could drive them well) won races and stockers were just that, hopped up "stockers." They better represented what people drove on the street, so they had more mass fan appeal. The specialty cars (CJ, DP and COPO) and teams who run them enjoy this attention, but this same doesn't exist for other cars. Stock is now the name of our class, but we race race cars and the appeal is within our circles, not to the masses.
Also, a guy can build a street-legal car that is faster than most of our Stocker, so what is the appeal for kids to build a dedicated race car that they can only use at NHRA races and they may have to take apart?

2. Fear of AHFS

3. With today's connectivity (Internet) everyone knows how fast your cars is, you don't have to tear down, set a record, or wait for a magazine article to see who is fast.

4. Poor promotion of the performance end of Stock/Super Stock. NHRA can do more to brag about these awesome machines we have and they don't reach out to magazines like the one I edit to come cover the action. That is not a bash of NHRA, it is fact. They should be inviting us out to watch the cars and cover the events.
Furthermore, you are only a "somebody" if you win races and let's face it, that's based mainly on bracket-driving ability. (having a fast car is important, but there is no reward for having a fast car). Guys like Jenkins and Sox were great drivers, but they always had fast cars. Heck, WJ made a name for himself driving around people.

That's my rant, here's my solution, which I have offered to NHRA, and that is to simply award points for qualifying and setting records. This rewards those who spend money with the aftermarket, make their cars fast and drive them well.

Top 8 (or 16) qualifiers at each event get points. Most points go to No.1 then a declining scale. Ex. No 1 qualifier gets 16 pts, No 16 gets 1 pt. Also, award 20 points for a national record, and to prevent going overboard with it, limit how many records you can set in a year. I would also love to see less classes with more cars, that would make a big difference, but only if there is a reward for it.

If NHRA wants performance to count, reward us for improving our performance.


Evan

[jmcarter]

Evan, your solution favors the new cars too much; where FS is contested (with current indexes) guess who will lock up all the 'extra' points? And FS runs don't count against AFHS as currently ran so they run under whatever it takes while other cars risk HP to get qualified that high. Until such time as the newer car factors get a bit more 'leveled' via AFHS the upper class records will be dominated by them. With championships being decided by a single point they needed to be determined by the driver, not by how big a check they can write for a new car. Of course it's easy to get 100K+ tied up in a 'older' combination when you factor in R&D but what you've suggested gives too much advantage to the newer cars and the $$$ involved to invest in one of them plus updates along the way.

[Wade_Owens]

Originally Posted by Evan Smith

Top 8 (or 16) qualifiers at each event get points. Most points go to No.1 then a declining scale. Ex. No 1 qualifier gets 16 pts, No 16 gets 1 pt. Also, award 20 points for a national record, and to prevent going overboard with it, limit how many records you can set in a year. I would also love to see less classes with more cars, that would make a big difference, but only if there is a reward for it.

Boy, that would have sure shuffled your top ten finishers in Stock and Super Stock this year. Good luck getting that in the books.

Less classes, more heads ups would place an even larger advantage on the new cars. I am not a new car hater, just sayin'.....

Wade

[Michael Beard]

Also, award 20 points for a national record, and to prevent going overboard with it, limit how many records you can set in a year.

IHRA used to award 5pts for a Record, max of 2x per year. That was enough to make all the points chasers set records, go through teardown, etc. Records became deciding factors in some championships, with people even car-hopping, and record points became a thing of the past.

[treekiller]

I have a solution which is gonna sound ignorant to the old school die hards who think having the fastest car in a certain class is the most important thing on the earth . I have heard the whole "There is pride in making your car run the fastest within a certain set of rules" blah blah blah. Eliminate heads up runs in eliminations. Make everyone have a dial in. I have never had it happen but can you imagine taking a week off of work to go to a national event , spending thousands to do it and going two or three rounds driving your ***** off and catching some cat in your class in the fourth rd w a 100,000 car who doesn't even have to look at the tree, he can just watch you leave and run you down before the 330 mark. Now I ask is this gonna make you say damn I gotta get in the garage and find some hp that ain't gonna be enough to make up the three or four tents the guy in the 100,000 car has on you or are you gonna say f it and go bracket racing where the field is a bit more level ? Let guys set records in time trials and tear them down or don't. It's just gonna be copos dps mustangs and the glasbrenners and I know that heads up finals are rare but doing it this way would almost always ensure that everyone has a fair shot and you will win or lose based on your driving that day not how much money you have.

[treekiller]

A positive side effect of a change like that would be car counts going up because there are a lot of small time guys that don't go to Nast because of fast cars tear downs and the other assorted bs that nhra throws at the sportsman racer

[Ed Wright]

Why not just give everybody a trophy too?

[treekiller]

What does nhra offer someone for setting a record? you get a horse power hit and bragging rights?I'll take the trophy thanks

[novassdude]

Originally Posted by treekiller

A positive side effect of a change like that would be car counts going up because there are a lot of small time guys that don't go to Nast because of fast cars tear downs and the other assorted bs that nhra throws at the sportsman racer

The things you call bs is exactly what sets class racing apart from Bracket racing. Take away the heads up and teardown and you might just as well call it bracket 1. It is not for everyone.
My car may not get out much but take away heads up and it would never come back out as a class car. And this from a guy that runs a well populated class with a car that will get smoked in the majority of heads up. So it would be to my advantage to get rid of them. I have nothing against bracket racing did a lot of it and probably will again some day.

You have said you don't have a class car so why are you here suggesting we change the rules in a class you don't run.

I have yet to see a class racer in the bracket form telling them they need to change the rules.

[Evan Smith]

Why do people feel NHRA is "out to get them" or are trying to push racers out just because it allows new cars to compete? Do you have a TV with rabbit ears, or a carb on your street car (okay, don't answer that), or any old technology for daily life? Do you have a smart phone? I'll tell you why, because the rules don't suit them, that's why and people feel the NHRA should exist for their own personal purpose.

It's called evolution people. There isn't one other class in NHRA where you can be competitive with old equipment. Okay, so one guy wins here and there with no throttle stop in Super Street, but you don't see cars from the '80s and '90s winning in the .90 classes. Why should it be a "right" to be competitive with an old race car when there is new, better technology available? Should NHRA ignore the new cars? Well then you'd have a nostalgia series, at least until everyone got old and quit racing, then you'd have nothing.

Racers get out of the sport for many reasons and I'm sure some decided they didn't want to compete against new cars, but to make a blanket statement that a mass of racers were pushed out is just not factual. And, for all who've quit, there are many new racers.

Please keep in mind that I love muscle cars from the 60s and 70s and I would love to see them continue on. I also own a 20-year old Stocker and I know it's day in the sun has passed. It's competitive, but who cares about that? It's my choice to update or be content racing a car that is outdated. Everyone else has the same choice.