Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races - Page 13

tgriffith · 11-30-2007, 08:24 PM

you know,,,before some of you go off on NHRA on some "not thought out" ideas like lowering indexes .50 and running off of records, and a 64 quaified field,,,,you might want to be carefull what you ask for,,,,it just might happen,,,,,you have to remember that alot of racers dont build their parts in the backyard anymore and race "Store Bought stockers" ,,, have very DEEP pockets to go VERY FAST,,,,so while one might be sitting 1.00 under now,,,if it becomes a "who can go the quickest" might find themselves outside looking in

I know of a few guys that would love the idea of running off the record,,,,isnt that right Mark Y (LOL) ........ that mustang of your would look killer on the front cover of the National Dragster!!!!

RPinoski1 · 11-30-2007, 08:26 PM

Just a little to add to this. When they allowed all natural SS cars to move to the top of a class eliminating the 200LB maximum weight removal rule the HP factors that were in place were no longer valid. Next came the rule where natural SS cars could move up a class this again messed up all the HP factors.

They should have administered the AHFS without all the other changes listd above. I don't believe these things were accounted for when they did these changes.

For instance with my 67 NOVA. When the 327 275/295 got hit to 299 anyone that could move their car to SS/GA from the natural HA/IA were not hurt as bad as the guys that were stuck say in SS/IA.
If the car is in SS/GA and triggers the hit, the lower class cars are hurt exponentally more then the SS/GA car that originally caused caused the HP hit.

I know this works across the board for all combos.

I don't think the AHFS takes this in to account. In fact I know it doesn't!

I have to believe the Ol' Guy that created the factoring system (forgot his name) took this in to account by having the maximum weight removal to go to the top of natural class and not being allowed to move up in class.

Anyone care to expound on this..............

Speedracer · 11-30-2007, 09:45 PM

1) If NHRA insists to limit fields, limit the field but not the entrants.If 200 racers want to qualify for 75 positions, let 'em fight for it.

2) Lower all indexes .500.

3) AHFS trigger set to "review" at 1.00 under index.

4) Maximum ballast 100#.

5) Combine FI cars with carb cars first, later combine stick and auto.

6) All runs @ National events count.

7) As stated by Evan Smith previously, points for accomplishments.

I'm trying to figure out how all of these changes would affect a current Stock Eliminator racer that currently runs one second under the index?

1) NHRA has limited the fields because of time constraints and lack of pit space.There is not going to be 200 cars permitted anyways.If they were to qualify 64 cars,one second under (the current index) probably doesn't qualify.
2) Lowering the index a half second for somebody that is one second under means that now they are "only a half second under"........So what?
3)Triggering the AHFS to 1.00 under (which would be 1.5 under the OLD index) means that a particular combination has a half second advantage over the car that is currently one second under before giving any horsepower would be considered.
4)Maximum ballast?There are MANY ways to slow a car down.What does a maximum ballast rule accomplish?
5) Combine classes and have more heads up.How is the one second under car (current index) going to beat or even have a chance against a car that can run 1.5 under ?(current index)Every tenth of a second equates to around 20 horsepower.How do you work on your combo in Stock Eliminator to pick up 100 horsepower?
6) All runs at National events count...So what?
Class eliminations have turned into a bracket race.Once the faster car has caught up to the slower car,he starts braking to keep from going too fast.None of the runs will ever show the true potential of a Fast car unless they get a one second reaction time and decide to run it all out.
7) Points for accomplishments?
How about points for tearing down your engine and BONUS points for pulling a piston.Proving your accomplishments should be worth more than just running fast.How about a teardown commitee of racers that could make the decision instead of a tech guy that has his hands tied?

To me,if your car can run one second under your currrent index,you have done a fine job.How do any of these proposals benefit that car/driver?

Bruce Noland · 11-30-2007, 10:26 PM

Len,

I have sent you a ton of letters over this issue and you have continued to defend the changes. And as you know we are not talking about minor changes. They are both dramatic and hurtful to the racers.

I'll just pull out one for all of us to discuss and then we can move forward through the other serious changes that have been slipped into the ahfs without prior publication or notice to the racers.

In the most recent version under the paragraph Body Style and Engine Type - the fourth sentence states. "In some instances, however, more than one body style will trigger a review." This sentence is not in the orginal version that the racers helped to develop.

And this sentence isn't just about Novas and Camaros. Under Wesley and Skelly this sentence is combining the following body styles. Camaro, Chev II, Chevelle, Corvette, Century, Regal, Cutlas, Omega, Phoenix, Ventura, Firebird, LeMans, Skylark. Soup to nuts! This was not the intent of the original ahfs!

Never before has this grouping of vehicles been considered for reviews and not one person at nhra notified any of the racers that this grouping existed. Only after the review period was over did we find out about this bazaar combination of cars.

The most recent version contains many unannounced changes from the original version. As you know, after all my letters to you and many others at nhra, including Peter Clifford, this is not a minor change.

The fact that nhra may from time to time slip in a "minor" change to the ahfs does not mean that it has given the racers a fair notice that these changes have been added. Like most motor sports organizations, nhra has had a history of publishing all changes in advance of implemtation but that has not been the case with the ahfs. Why?

Michael Beard · 11-30-2007, 11:03 PM

It's been noted that a number of performance-related concessions have been made over the years, superceded parts, this, and that. I don't feel that an AHFS hit is an attempt to "slow racers down" as much as it is to get cars classified correctly. Since cars have made performance gains through various concessions, why *shouldn't* they have their horsepower adjusted? HP ratings are supposed to reflect a combinations potential. More potential, more horsepower. Once a car is correctly classified and factored, y'all can go aas fast as you want!

>> 3) AHFS trigger set to "review" at 1.00 under index.

Is it better to have an imperfect AHFS system, or the pre-AHFS factoring by committee?

>> 4) Maximum ballast 100#.

How about if your race weight exceeds the minimum weight for the next heavier class, you *must* claim that class? ie., if you're running in B/SA at C/SA weight, you must claim C/SA for that event.

5) Combine FI cars with carb cars first, later combine stick and auto.

Many folks like to claim S/SS as performance eliminators, that is until you start combining classes to come up with more heads-up runs... If two classes have the same index, why would they not be considered the same class? They just need letter designations for indexes, not combinations.

Speedracer · 11-30-2007, 11:10 PM

NORWALK, Ohio - Final order after 3 rounds of qualifying in Stock Eliminator at the NHRA POWERade Drag Racing Series, Inaugural Summit Racing Equipment NHRA Nationals:

Psn--Num--Class-Driver, Home Town, Machine-----------------ET---Index---(+/-)

1 1788 H/SA Bruce Noland, Leesburg VA, '73 Camaro 11.214 12.45 -1.236
2 3656 D/FIA Bruce Witherspoon, Lansing MI, '90 Corvette11.192 12.30 -1.108
3 1499 B/SA Jim Boudreau, Tewksburry MA, '69 Camaro 10.454 11.55 -1.096
4 2808 B/FIA Bobby Warren, Clinton NC, '98 Firebird 10.629 11.70 -1.071
5 1044 A/SA John Shaul, Fultonham NY, '64 Fury 10.264 11.30 -1.036
6 1656 A/SA Kenneth Miele, Egg Harbor Twp NJ, '67 Shel 10.282 11.30 -1.018
7 3200 K/SA Tim Lowe, Macy IN, '72 Skylark 11.951 12.95 -0.999
8 1056 C/S Todd Bednaz, Terryville CT, '68 Camaro 10.656 11.65 -0.994
9 1021 J/SA Gene Monahan, Brockton MA, '86 Firebird 11.757 12.75 -0.993
10 751 D/S Ben Wenzel Sr., Freeland MI, '67 Camaro 10.823 11.80 -0.977

Regardless of what the published rules for AHFS are,here is a situation that looks like it warrants horsepower.The number one qualifier was well over a tenth of a second faster than the number two qualifier,and over a quarter of a second faster than the number ten qualifier.I'm sure he worked real hard on his combination,but he could have still been number one qualifier by running 1.13 under and slowed it down a tenth.What we don't know is if the numbers 2-10 qualifiers were in bracket mode?On paper though,it looks like horsepower is warranted.

Jeff Lee · 12-01-2007, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

It's been noted that a number of performance-related concessions have been made over the years, superceded parts, this, and that. I don't feel that an AHFS hit is an attempt to "slow racers down" as much as it is to get cars classified correctly. Since cars have made performance gains through various concessions, why *shouldn't* they have their horsepower adjusted? HP ratings are supposed to reflect a combinations potential. More potential, more horsepower. Once a car is correctly classified and factored, y'all can go aas fast as you want!

Can't say as I disagree!

>> 3) AHFS trigger set to "review" at 1.00 under index.

Is it better to have an imperfect AHFS system, or the pre-AHFS factoring by committee?

Committe will always leave an impression of favoritisim, used for and against compititors. Also, I think it's pretty clear that NHRA wants as little effort placed on the class as possible on their part. Either by design or default (lack of resources), that's just the way it is. Therefore, imperfect AHFS.

>> 4) Maximum ballast 100#.

How about if your race weight exceeds the minimum weight for the next heavier class, you *must* claim that class? ie., if you're running in B/SA at C/SA weight, you must claim C/SA for that event.

Sounds fair enough.

5) Combine FI cars with carb cars first, later combine stick and auto.

Many folks like to claim S/SS as performance eliminators, that is until you start combining classes to come up with more heads-up runs... If two classes have the same index, why would they not be considered the same class? They just need letter designations for indexes, not combinations.

Bottom line: more heads-up races. Cut it, name it, brand it any way you want, the end result is still the same. Sponsors, manufacturers and fans are all happier. Some racers will be disappointed.

Michael,
my responses are in bold text.

Tgriffith,
Your "wish what your asking for" statement is accurate. As I stated, under this idea I would only be .29 under with present conditions of my SS/H AMX. The problem I constantly see here on this forum is everybody wants what is best for themselves. If I could not make a show because of this, so be it. I'll work harder. Could be successful, could be a failure. But I firmly believe that if performance is not king in this class (S & SS), then it will die.
Note: these idea's are not just mine. They are an accumulation of many other's I am in contact with. They just don't want to get torn apart by the lions (or kitties, whichever they may be)!

Len Imbrogno · 12-01-2007, 12:30 AM

Bruce,

The statement you are refering to has been in the AHFS write-up since its origin, as post on the NHRA website on 1/31/2003 under "AHFS explained". It can be accessed in the NHRA website archives for everyone to see.

Jeremy · 12-01-2007, 01:21 AM

NHRA has done many thing's to make the Bracket Racers happy. Most all local racing is for them, they invented Super Street, Super Gas, Super Comp, Top Sportsman, Top Dragster and changed much of Stock and Super Stock for them. I don't think they will be happy until they have all of Stock and Super Stock and performance will be gone.
NHRA would you please leave Stock and Super Stock some what a performance based class, it's the only place I have to race.
Thanks

Speedracer · 12-01-2007, 01:36 AM

Jeremy,
Have you ever raced at an event where you took your shoe polish and predicted what your car will run?
If so,you have BRACKET RACED!
Also,I believe you race a 340 engine.I apologize if that is not correct.Years ago,those cars didn't run very fast at all.In the last few years,everyone of them seems to be well into the 10 second zone.
How did they pick up all of this et?
I'm thinking the heads are not Stock for one thing.Another is that the replacement piston that is accepted is not really made to the same specifications as the Stock Piston.This allows the combination to take full advantage of the "new cam rules" from years ago.
Clearly,these items have helped improve the performance of the 340 cars among other things.The whole point of this thread has been discussing AHFS.The horsepower needs to be adjusted on the 340 because of these improvements.Thanks.

11-30-2007, 08:24 PM	#121
tgriffith Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 187 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races you know,,,before some of you go off on NHRA on some "not thought out" ideas like lowering indexes .50 and running off of records, and a 64 quaified field,,,,you might want to be carefull what you ask for,,,,it just might happen,,,,,you have to remember that alot of racers dont build their parts in the backyard anymore and race "Store Bought stockers" ,,, have very DEEP pockets to go VERY FAST,,,,so while one might be sitting 1.00 under now,,,if it becomes a "who can go the quickest" might find themselves outside looking in I know of a few guys that would love the idea of running off the record,,,,isnt that right Mark Y (LOL) ........ that mustang of your would look killer on the front cover of the National Dragster!!!!

11-30-2007, 08:26 PM	#122
RPinoski1 Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: PLACERVILLE, CA Posts: 182 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races Just a little to add to this. When they allowed all natural SS cars to move to the top of a class eliminating the 200LB maximum weight removal rule the HP factors that were in place were no longer valid. Next came the rule where natural SS cars could move up a class this again messed up all the HP factors. They should have administered the AHFS without all the other changes listd above. I don't believe these things were accounted for when they did these changes. For instance with my 67 NOVA. When the 327 275/295 got hit to 299 anyone that could move their car to SS/GA from the natural HA/IA were not hurt as bad as the guys that were stuck say in SS/IA. If the car is in SS/GA and triggers the hit, the lower class cars are hurt exponentally more then the SS/GA car that originally caused caused the HP hit. I know this works across the board for all combos. I don't think the AHFS takes this in to account. In fact I know it doesn't! I have to believe the Ol' Guy that created the factoring system (forgot his name) took this in to account by having the maximum weight removal to go to the top of natural class and not being allowed to move up in class. Anyone care to expound on this..............

11-30-2007, 09:45 PM	#123
Speedracer Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 59 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races 1) If NHRA insists to limit fields, limit the field but not the entrants.If 200 racers want to qualify for 75 positions, let 'em fight for it. 2) Lower all indexes .500. 3) AHFS trigger set to "review" at 1.00 under index. 4) Maximum ballast 100#. 5) Combine FI cars with carb cars first, later combine stick and auto. 6) All runs @ National events count. 7) As stated by Evan Smith previously, points for accomplishments. I'm trying to figure out how all of these changes would affect a current Stock Eliminator racer that currently runs one second under the index? 1) NHRA has limited the fields because of time constraints and lack of pit space.There is not going to be 200 cars permitted anyways.If they were to qualify 64 cars,one second under (the current index) probably doesn't qualify. 2) Lowering the index a half second for somebody that is one second under means that now they are "only a half second under"........So what? 3)Triggering the AHFS to 1.00 under (which would be 1.5 under the OLD index) means that a particular combination has a half second advantage over the car that is currently one second under before giving any horsepower would be considered. 4)Maximum ballast?There are MANY ways to slow a car down.What does a maximum ballast rule accomplish? 5) Combine classes and have more heads up.How is the one second under car (current index) going to beat or even have a chance against a car that can run 1.5 under ?(current index)Every tenth of a second equates to around 20 horsepower.How do you work on your combo in Stock Eliminator to pick up 100 horsepower? 6) All runs at National events count...So what? Class eliminations have turned into a bracket race.Once the faster car has caught up to the slower car,he starts braking to keep from going too fast.None of the runs will ever show the true potential of a Fast car unless they get a one second reaction time and decide to run it all out. 7) Points for accomplishments? How about points for tearing down your engine and BONUS points for pulling a piston.Proving your accomplishments should be worth more than just running fast.How about a teardown commitee of racers that could make the decision instead of a tech guy that has his hands tied? To me,if your car can run one second under your currrent index,you have done a fine job.How do any of these proposals benefit that car/driver? Last edited by Speedracer; 11-30-2007 at 10:16 PM.

11-30-2007, 10:26 PM	#124
Bruce Noland VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1,855 Likes: 83 Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races Len, I have sent you a ton of letters over this issue and you have continued to defend the changes. And as you know we are not talking about minor changes. They are both dramatic and hurtful to the racers. I'll just pull out one for all of us to discuss and then we can move forward through the other serious changes that have been slipped into the ahfs without prior publication or notice to the racers. In the most recent version under the paragraph Body Style and Engine Type - the fourth sentence states. "In some instances, however, more than one body style will trigger a review." This sentence is not in the orginal version that the racers helped to develop. And this sentence isn't just about Novas and Camaros. Under Wesley and Skelly this sentence is combining the following body styles. Camaro, Chev II, Chevelle, Corvette, Century, Regal, Cutlas, Omega, Phoenix, Ventura, Firebird, LeMans, Skylark. Soup to nuts! This was not the intent of the original ahfs! Never before has this grouping of vehicles been considered for reviews and not one person at nhra notified any of the racers that this grouping existed. Only after the review period was over did we find out about this bazaar combination of cars. The most recent version contains many unannounced changes from the original version. As you know, after all my letters to you and many others at nhra, including Peter Clifford, this is not a minor change. The fact that nhra may from time to time slip in a "minor" change to the ahfs does not mean that it has given the racers a fair notice that these changes have been added. Like most motor sports organizations, nhra has had a history of publishing all changes in advance of implemtation but that has not been the case with the ahfs. Why? __________________ Bruce Noland 1788 STK Last edited by Bruce Noland; 11-30-2007 at 10:44 PM.

11-30-2007, 11:03 PM	#125
Michael Beard VIP Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Columbus, OH Posts: 4,060 Likes: 0 Liked 13 Times in 9 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races It's been noted that a number of performance-related concessions have been made over the years, superceded parts, this, and that. I don't feel that an AHFS hit is an attempt to "slow racers down" as much as it is to get cars classified correctly. Since cars have made performance gains through various concessions, why shouldn't they have their horsepower adjusted? HP ratings are supposed to reflect a combinations potential. More potential, more horsepower. Once a car is correctly classified and factored, y'all can go aas fast as you want! >> 3) AHFS trigger set to "review" at 1.00 under index. Is it better to have an imperfect AHFS system, or the pre-AHFS factoring by committee? >> 4) Maximum ballast 100#. How about if your race weight exceeds the minimum weight for the next heavier class, you must claim that class? ie., if you're running in B/SA at C/SA weight, you must claim C/SA for that event. 5) Combine FI cars with carb cars first, later combine stick and auto. Many folks like to claim S/SS as performance eliminators, that is until you start combining classes to come up with more heads-up runs... If two classes have the same index, why would they not be considered the same class? They just need letter designations for indexes, not combinations. __________________ Michael Beard - NHRA/IHRA 3216 S/SS

11-30-2007, 11:10 PM	#126
Speedracer Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 59 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races NORWALK, Ohio - Final order after 3 rounds of qualifying in Stock Eliminator at the NHRA POWERade Drag Racing Series, Inaugural Summit Racing Equipment NHRA Nationals: Psn--Num--Class-Driver, Home Town, Machine-----------------ET---Index---(+/-) 1 1788 H/SA Bruce Noland, Leesburg VA, '73 Camaro 11.214 12.45 -1.236 2 3656 D/FIA Bruce Witherspoon, Lansing MI, '90 Corvette11.192 12.30 -1.108 3 1499 B/SA Jim Boudreau, Tewksburry MA, '69 Camaro 10.454 11.55 -1.096 4 2808 B/FIA Bobby Warren, Clinton NC, '98 Firebird 10.629 11.70 -1.071 5 1044 A/SA John Shaul, Fultonham NY, '64 Fury 10.264 11.30 -1.036 6 1656 A/SA Kenneth Miele, Egg Harbor Twp NJ, '67 Shel 10.282 11.30 -1.018 7 3200 K/SA Tim Lowe, Macy IN, '72 Skylark 11.951 12.95 -0.999 8 1056 C/S Todd Bednaz, Terryville CT, '68 Camaro 10.656 11.65 -0.994 9 1021 J/SA Gene Monahan, Brockton MA, '86 Firebird 11.757 12.75 -0.993 10 751 D/S Ben Wenzel Sr., Freeland MI, '67 Camaro 10.823 11.80 -0.977 Regardless of what the published rules for AHFS are,here is a situation that looks like it warrants horsepower.The number one qualifier was well over a tenth of a second faster than the number two qualifier,and over a quarter of a second faster than the number ten qualifier.I'm sure he worked real hard on his combination,but he could have still been number one qualifier by running 1.13 under and slowed it down a tenth.What we don't know is if the numbers 2-10 qualifiers were in bracket mode?On paper though,it looks like horsepower is warranted.

12-01-2007, 12:30 AM	#128
Len Imbrogno Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 40 Likes: 1 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races Bruce, The statement you are refering to has been in the AHFS write-up since its origin, as post on the NHRA website on 1/31/2003 under "AHFS explained". It can be accessed in the NHRA website archives for everyone to see. __________________ Len Imbrogno

12-01-2007, 01:21 AM	#129
Jeremy Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 95 Likes: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races NHRA has done many thing's to make the Bracket Racers happy. Most all local racing is for them, they invented Super Street, Super Gas, Super Comp, Top Sportsman, Top Dragster and changed much of Stock and Super Stock for them. I don't think they will be happy until they have all of Stock and Super Stock and performance will be gone. NHRA would you please leave Stock and Super Stock some what a performance based class, it's the only place I have to race. Thanks

12-01-2007, 01:36 AM	#130
Speedracer Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 59 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Word is 1.15 under for AHFS at Opens and Divisional races Jeremy, Have you ever raced at an event where you took your shoe polish and predicted what your car will run? If so,you have BRACKET RACED! Also,I believe you race a 340 engine.I apologize if that is not correct.Years ago,those cars didn't run very fast at all.In the last few years,everyone of them seems to be well into the 10 second zone. How did they pick up all of this et? I'm thinking the heads are not Stock for one thing.Another is that the replacement piston that is accepted is not really made to the same specifications as the Stock Piston.This allows the combination to take full advantage of the "new cam rules" from years ago. Clearly,these items have helped improve the performance of the 340 cars among other things.The whole point of this thread has been discussing AHFS.The horsepower needs to be adjusted on the 340 because of these improvements.Thanks.