SS/JA should be good! - Page 6

Bobby DiDomenico · 09-03-2014, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

I don't know how much he will get. Do you? If you are correct, they always run it more than that heavy anyway.

Interesting Ed,
Do they not use the actual run weight when calculating HP? If you are already getting factored at a weight heavier than you will be required to run in the future the system is even more flawed than many here feel it is:-)

Ed Wright · 09-03-2014, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby DiDomenico

Interesting Ed,
Do they not use the actual run weight when calculating HP? If you are already getting factored at a weight heavier than you will be required to run in the future the system is even more flawed than many here feel it is:-)

No, Bobby, a lot of us run heavy to avoid hitting the 1 under trigger and to keep our AHFS average down. They run that car more than 100 over weight anyway. As far as I know, NHRA doesn't monitor what we go across the scales at. Hope not anyway. :-)

When mine is healthy I usually run it 140 heavy. I didn't need to as weak as it has been these last couple of weeks. I finally took all the weight out at Indy, and best it went was -.879.
Need to get it back out of the car. I think know what it needs now, to get back where it was. Won't be as fast as Ricky's, but better than it is.

442OLDS · 09-03-2014, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

No, Bobby, a lot of us run heavy to avoid hitting the 1 under trigger and to keep our AHFS average down. They run that car more than 100 over weight anyway. As far as I know, NHRA doesn't monitor what we go across the scales at. Hope not anyway. :-)

When mine is healthy I usually run it 140 heavy. I didn't need to as weak as it has been these last couple of weeks. I finally took all the weight out at Indy, and best it went was -.879.
Need to get it back out of the car. I think know what it needs now, to get back where it was. Won't be as fast as Ricky's, but better than it is.

Sounds like a pretty good combo.

Jeff Niceswanger · 09-03-2014, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Is Ronnie Terrell's car bogus? He killed ten MPH and ran quicker (9.805) than any SS/JA car there. Then screwed with it before the next round, and could only run 9.85 out the back door. He changed it right back. :-)

I've thought for a long time Ronnie had the fastest SS/JA car on the planet. I still do. Ricky is not far off. He is bad fast.

I was in the other lane when Ronnie went the .805. I don't understand this "after the race " conversation . Decker beat us ALL. Class at Indy is over.... Same day, same track..
BTW.... When Ronnie and I ran in the morning the Air was 2750.... I helped Rickey in the final and the air was 1000 feet worse and we had lost some tailwind.

442OLDS · 09-03-2014, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby DiDomenico

Interesting Ed,
Do they not use the actual run weight when calculating HP? If you are already getting factored at a weight heavier than you will be required to run in the future the system is even more flawed than many here feel it is:-)

Where is the "LIKE" button?

Randall Klein · 09-03-2014, 11:44 AM

You can run heavy, but a few years ago you could not weigh more than the next lower class, i.e., I cannot run SS/MA at SS/NA weight. A minor point since hardly anyone runs that heavy, but at Norwalk about 3 years ago Travis held a meeting in the trailer at Tech explaning that

It may have changed

I did observe a racer removing 200 lbs at Joliet one year...hard to do when its "welded in"

countrypuppy4865 · 09-03-2014, 12:30 PM

The 360 will receive 9hp. The old minimum weight for SS/IA was 2920. It will now be 3010.

Ed Wright · 09-03-2014, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countrypuppy4865

The 360 will receive 9hp. The old minimum weight for SS/IA was 2920. It will now be 3010.

Don't think that will bother that car much, do you?

Mike Voth · 09-04-2014, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Don't think that will bother that car much, do you?

How many cars actually run near minimum anyway? Not many, I'm guessing.

Ed Wright · 09-04-2014, 02:32 PM

I'm usually 140 over, except the last four weekends where it had slowed down so bad.
Had all the weight out on the 10.12 pass. No weight, no restirctor plate, still slow. LOL
Just need to get the car out of the trailer, and take it back apart. It's only money, right?

09-03-2014, 11:44 AM	#56
Randall Klein Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Lincoln, Nebraska Posts: 785 Likes: 45 Liked 316 Times in 67 Posts	Re: SS/JA should be good! You can run heavy, but a few years ago you could not weigh more than the next lower class, i.e., I cannot run SS/MA at SS/NA weight. A minor point since hardly anyone runs that heavy, but at Norwalk about 3 years ago Travis held a meeting in the trailer at Tech explaning that It may have changed I did observe a racer removing 200 lbs at Joliet one year...hard to do when its "welded in"

09-03-2014, 12:30 PM	#57
countrypuppy4865 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Donaldsonville, LA Posts: 980 Likes: 17 Liked 228 Times in 70 Posts	Re: SS/JA should be good! The 360 will receive 9hp. The old minimum weight for SS/IA was 2920. It will now be 3010. __________________ Jimmy "Cooter" Hidalgo, Jr. 4865 E/SA '04 GTO 4865 SS/GA '99 Firebird

09-04-2014, 02:32 PM	#60
Ed Wright Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sand Springs, OK Posts: 8,132 Likes: 896 Liked 390 Times in 170 Posts	Re: SS/JA should be good! I'm usually 140 over, except the last four weekends where it had slowed down so bad. Had all the weight out on the 10.12 pass. No weight, no restirctor plate, still slow. LOL Just need to get the car out of the trailer, and take it back apart. It's only money, right? __________________ Ed Wright 4156 SS/JA