Old vs New during rounds

[Michael Beard]

Your mistaken about the heads ups. Been there.

No. Winning is a symptom, not causality. You may have been beat because a car was underfactored. The car was not underfactored because it beat you. I will get beat heads-up every time with my DragPak. That does not mean that it is not ridiculously underfactored. It means that I didn't spend money on mine.

HP Factors should not be determined based on winning percentages. HP Factors should be based on a working knowledge of engines, combinations, and real-world performance.

The HP factors on the 'factory race cars' are in no way shape or form defensible. Even production street cars are advertised at significantly higher HP. The fact that NHRA has done the same thing in the past does not make it right. Quite the opposite, such experience should have led to more proper decisions.

The idea that anyone with $100,000 invested in their car over a lifetime can or should scrap their car to purchase a new $100,000 car, or to scrap it and build only M/SA and slower cars is absolutely ridiculous. If someone has the wherewithal to do so and that's what they want to do: that's perfectly fine. No problem, have at it. If you want to take advantage of extremely favorable HP factors, no problem, have at it. I did. It's the only way I could afford getting into Super Stock, and I did it specifically *because* it was ridiculously underfactored.

[Ed Wright]

^^^^^ Yep, good post.

[Joseph Teuton]

Guys yall are taking this all wrong.

All I was trying to get accross is that the old cars have won more races than the newer cars. If I'm not mistaken we all go to the races to "win" and have a good time. It seems that you dont need a "new" or the "fastest" in the class car to win.

Michael you are 100% correct that "The idea that anyone with $100,000 invested in their car over a lifetime can or should scrap their car to purchase a new $100,000 car, or to scrap it and build only M/SA and slower cars is absolutely ridiculous." I never brought up a dollar amount because money should not be the reason a car or driver wins, I simply stated that with the time and r&r that yall have put into yall's cars most likley equals the amount that was put in our cars at the time of purchase. You even stated that " I did. It's the only way I could afford getting into Super Stock, and I did it specifically *because* it was ridiculously underfactored." So we can pick an choose the cars we want to drive on this same factor? Everyone in racing wants as much advactage as they can get. We all know there will be a time when the combonation we are running will be no more good. This is why they have a whole bunch of other classes to race to make sure you stay away from the cars you dont want to run untill you get the combo you are looking for. That hasnt changed since NHRA was developed.

Yall have yall's opinion, we have ours. Back to the Title of the post...
I have 2 people that has posted they were out ran by a new car in the last 5 years. Im not saying this doesnt happen..... all im saying is does it happen enough for yall to keep bringing this up over and over again?

Underfactored cars does not equal better cars. Aren't we all just looking for the BEST race car? I may have this all wrong, I've been told this before. Hope all have a great Friday! The parades start tonight here in Houma,La!!