65-85 under.

[Alan Roehrich]

I do understand that there are lower classes, below G, and below where I like to run. Race cars should go pretty fast, at least for me, or they're just not really fun. If it won't run the quarter at least as well as my Harley Pro street Breakout, it just doesn't do it for me. I realize that ain't where everyone is in the sport. Some people really enjoy 13, 14, 15, and 16 second cars. That's their choice. And hey, maybe their indexes don't need adjustment, or much adjustment.



Like Barry Parker said, as much as lot of us older guys would love to see a return, at least partially, to the tech we saw in the twentieth century, those days are gone. Forever. I have to live with the fact that, as Jimmy Bridges says to my wife, "me and your husband, we's cavemen, we from back in history." Doesn't mean I don't want NHRA to tighten tech up. Just means I'm old enough to know not to hold my breath waiting on it.


Relax and make peace with it. It might even make it easier to convince yourself to go racing. We ain't gonna live forever.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

I do understand that there are lower classes, below G, and below where I like to run. Race cars should go pretty fast, at least for me, or they're just not really fun. If it won't run the quarter at least as well as my Harley Pro street Breakout, it just doesn't do it for me. I realize that ain't where everyone is in the sport. Some people really enjoy 13, 14, 15, and 16 second cars. That's their choice. And hey, maybe their indexes don't need adjustment, or much adjustment.

Alan, your last 2 posts are "wise words from a wise man".
The only way that I could even consider an index reduction would be if it DIDN'T include the lower classes. You would have to agree that the "less than hi-performance" combos largely don't respond to or aren't included in many of the "enhancements" that have been given out over the years. Would you consider this for a minute? The L/SA index has been "screwy" (for lack of a better term) forever. Look it up. How about A thru K get -.10 (including the FS classes) and L down (including the FWD classes) get left as is? Or if A/K get -.20 and L down -.10? Would that be enough to keep the fast boys happy?

[442OLDS]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Alan, your last 2 posts are "wise words from a wise man".
The only way that I could even consider an index reduction would be if it DIDN'T include the lower classes. You would have to agree that the "less than hi-performance" combos largely don't respond to or aren't included in many of the "enhancements" that have been given out over the years. Would you consider this for a minute? The L/SA index has been "screwy" (for lack of a better term) forever. Look it up. How about A thru K get -.10 (including the FS classes) and L down (including the FWD classes) get left as is? Or if A/K get -.20 and L down -.10? Would that be enough to keep the fast boys happy?

At the St.Louis Divisional in October where 156 cars were trying to get into the top 128,the first 4 cars were L/SA and lower.
What is the point of this proposal?

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by 442OLDS

At the St.Louis Divisional in October where 156 cars were trying to get into the top 128,the first 4 cars were L/SA and lower.
What is the point of this proposal?

Well, you've got me on that one! Hit the indexes a second! I'll put something out there that will be OK.

[Frank Castros]

What year and why did the 396/375 replace the 427/425 as the engine of choice in the A/SA '69 Camaro?

[B Parker]

Originally Posted by Frank Castros

What year and why did the 396/375 replace the 427/425 as the engine of choice in the A/SA '69 Camaro?

Frank I still think the 427/425 is a good combo. I ran a 69 Camaro with a 350/255 for several years. Jimmy Marshal would always tell me to put a big block in it and have more fun. He was right in some ways but he forgot to tell me that it would eat a lot more money. I chose the 396/375 Hp because at that time the Aluminum head for the 427 was ten more Hp than the stock steel ones. My back was already not in good shape so lighter was better. Seems most of the guys that run the Aluminum head 427 like to run in AA. BP

[Kirk Morgan]

I like to read posts on this topic. I usually don,t post. When Allen mentioned the index adjustment a few years ago i thought it was time. I just purchased my 390 67 Fairlane post car in 2008. It ran about 4 tenths under the index here in division 4. The next year i freshened the engine and up graded the camshaft, ring and piston package and picked up about 5 tenths. My engine still had the OEM crank and iron heads. If it wasnt for my friend and racing mentor RJ Sledge i would have never got there. So they lower the index 3 tenths so i gained 2 tenths for all my effort. Now with that being said i think a index adjustment may hamper new people to get started in this type of racing if they dont have the funds to buy a top notch car or try to build there own on a budget. I was told from day 1 that this is a expensive sport and that proved to be so. Each year i would try to improve the car and slowly was able to improve performance. Anyway no matter what happens iam still game. Currently building a SSGT.

[B Parker]

Kirk I don't have the information but I would like to see them post all of the new Stock racer that have joined the Class in the last 5 years...I'd be willing to bet most have not built a car from the ground up. And the few that have knew what they were doing and went to a Stock engine builder. The problem with the AHFS the way it is now will put almost all the engine combo's in the pool to get HP at the end of the year. And for those who's car's can't run that fast there are others that may run your combo that can. Take a look at Indy qualifying this year in crap Indy air. The easy fix would have been lowering the index's a tenth. A lot of racers didn't want that. But as they say be careful what you wish for. BP

[Alan Roehrich]

The aluminum head is still a 10HP penalty on the 427/425. We ran it for years. We never had a high dollar set of killer aluminum heads, so I guess that's why I don't care for the combination, although I could put ours together fairly quick, and without breaking the bank. I just don't think it would be fast enough to suit me or be really competitive. I bought my old iron heads back, and I have another pair. They're all going to be checked and flowed. I don't know what we're going to run yet, if we run. I'm thinking our aluminum heads will be better on a 396, which I have a few parts for. If I were running a 69 Camaro myself, I'd be looking at the iron heads on the 427, and a four speed.



Myself, I want to go with a 69 Chevelle. My two favorite Stock eliminator cars ever, are Harry Vineyard's 69 Chevelle, and Kevin Borgstrom's 69 Chevelle Yenko clone. Who knows, maybe I can sell off enough stuff and get lucky.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Alan, your last 2 posts are "wise words from a wise man".
The only way that I could even consider an index reduction would be if it DIDN'T include the lower classes. You would have to agree that the "less than hi-performance" combos largely don't respond to or aren't included in many of the "enhancements" that have been given out over the years. Would you consider this for a minute? The L/SA index has been "screwy" (for lack of a better term) forever. Look it up. How about A thru K get -.10 (including the FS classes) and L down (including the FWD classes) get left as is? Or if A/K get -.20 and L down -.10? Would that be enough to keep the fast boys happy?

I have probably already said more than I should, or I am qualified to say. Again, we're parked, maybe for 2-5 more months, maybe for a lot longer, I don't know. I don't know if I'm through with my cancer treatments, I don't know how well or soon I will recover, and I don't know what the future holds, for me, or for my partner. I know what I want to do. God has yet to tell me what I'll get to do.


However, of course I agree, the combinations are all different. Some have gotten gifts, others have not. Almost all will gain from technological advances, some more than others.


The question becomes, do some people with some combinations have the right to hold everyone else back? That's asking a lot. Or, do some people with other combinations have the right to pull everyone else forward? Tough question.


There will always be a disparity. There will always be "the haves and the have nots," whether that be those who have time and money, and those who don't, those who want to work hard and those who want to slack, or those who have a combination with potential and those who don't.


You will, however, never stop progress. Whether it is progress you like and agree with, or progress you hate. It doesn't matter whether you like it, Barry Parker likes it, or I like it, it's going to happen, at best, we can hope to influence the direction. Trying to stop most of the progress will absolutely kill the class. It's already hard to draw a field, and a crowd to watch. Making the racing worse will not help that. We need to make the racing better, and improve the show, whether or not NHRA will promote it. Or the classes eventually die.


Perhaps those with legitimately slow combinations can get some help from NHRA in figuring out a way to more quickly move them to a class that they can compete in, without waiting years, instead of months. The problem there is, the system has been seriously "gamed", and NHRA is understandably reticent.



Those who simply refuse to invest the time, effort, and money to compete, one way or another, will eventually move on. Considering how tough Stock and Super Stock once were, that's how the classes started, and why they were separate from the brackets. It's not a matter of who does or doesn't like whom. It's a matter of the nature of a performance based class, eventually it gets serious about performance, or it dies, whether death is just the end, or a fundamental change in the class. If it ceases to be at least as performance oriented as it is now, or more, enough people absolutely will leave that death, as in the end, will be a certainty. There aren't enough "bracket" type racers to keep the classes alive as they are.



Let's be honest, the classes (Stock and Super Stock) need more competition, more speed, and lower ET's, in order to draw new competitors, and new spectators. We're still not working hard enough to get more class eliminations happening in front of more people, and we're not working hard enough to create more rewards for qualifying, for winning heads up races, etc. Whether or not it benefits any individual directly, it benefits the classes. And we're here literally arguing about whether or not to turn people loose and let them race without crippling their combination. I don't think racers or spectators are going to hang around for 1000' agreed dumps.



We need to step back and realize that some combinations have been rendered obsolete over the years, and they simply got parked, sold, or converted to street cars. we're not talking about combinations that there are tons of, we're talking about combinations that were marginal, and somewhat rare. No matter what, some combinations are going to fall by the wayside. Some people, willing to spend time and money, will save many others.


To put it simply, there's no solution that is going to make everyone happy, or keep everyone in the class. There are only solutions that are best for the class, and best for the majority. They're ALL trade offs. There will always be those who benefit, and those who don't, and some who get the short straw. The best we can hope for is continued survival of the class, and for NHRA to do good things for the class. Can there be compromise? Sure. The question is, is NHRA willing to work that hard on the classes? We may not like the answer.