|
|
View Poll Results: Yay or Nay | |||
This is a net good |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
85 | 44.97% |
This is a net bad |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
51 | 26.98% |
Don't care, I'm going to stay in my lane |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
53 | 28.04% |
Voters: 189. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Shelby, NC
Posts: 1,819
Likes: 2,162
Liked 2,341 Times in 551 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Due to standards that didn't exist in "The Way Back" the HP numbers that the manufacturers publish are much more honest than in the past. That would make them less than competetive in the world of NHRA Stock/SS racing.
__________________
Daren Poole-Adams NHRA Stock/SS 2007 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#2 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 22
Likes: 137
Liked 57 Times in 12 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Daren, thank you for the response to my question. I think what you are doing in terms of adding an exciting new car/combination to Stock Eliminator is a good thing and your hard work should be commended. However, one does not have to look back too far to see the results of what I believe is over generous NHRA HP ratings related to new cars/combinations. For example, 2010 INDY; 11 of the top 16 qualifiers were 2008-2010 entries. 2011 INDY; all top 16 qualifiers were 2008-2011 entries. In my opinion, new cars/combinations in Stock Eliminator should be competitive, but they should not be dominating classes full of previous top qualifiers that have been flogging out there combinations for the past 20+ years. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 102
Likes: 6
Liked 88 Times in 28 Posts
|
![]()
When classified by hp vs weight, body aerodynamics can be an advantage, old vs new.
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#4 | |||
VIP Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Shelby, NC
Posts: 1,819
Likes: 2,162
Liked 2,341 Times in 551 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Daren Poole-Adams NHRA Stock/SS 2007 Last edited by GUMP; 06-23-2025 at 02:06 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#5 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,105
Likes: 1,564
Liked 1,789 Times in 408 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Why should a new car immediately be able to negate all of the hard work, development, and investment of combinations people have had for a long time?
__________________
Alan Roehrich 212A G/S |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#6 |
VIP Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Shelby, NC
Posts: 1,819
Likes: 2,162
Liked 2,341 Times in 551 Posts
|
![]()
People were asking pretty much the same questions when the "supercars" ruined everything in the sixties....
__________________
Daren Poole-Adams NHRA Stock/SS 2007 |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#7 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,105
Likes: 1,564
Liked 1,789 Times in 408 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
"It's happened before" is no excuse for it to happen again. History is to be learned from, not repeated ad infinitum and ad nauseum.
__________________
Alan Roehrich 212A G/S |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#8 |
VIP Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Shelby, NC
Posts: 1,819
Likes: 2,162
Liked 2,341 Times in 551 Posts
|
![]()
I wasn't talking about the cars. I was talking about the crying...
__________________
Daren Poole-Adams NHRA Stock/SS 2007 |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NS CANADA
Posts: 885
Likes: 1,586
Liked 384 Times in 149 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Technology is great, but shouldn't replace hard work. So the question becomes, how do you stop newer technology from dumping all over older tech that was messaged to get where it is? Factor it correctly. What happened when fwd cars came out? The hp/weight didn't take into account of the natural problem of pulling the car compared to pushing the car so they were factored by themselves (fwd classes) What happened when turbos became common? Spec's for turbos to prevent "cranking it up and dominating" (buddy ingersol turbo pro stock) What happened when blowers became common? Pulley dia spec's. The common denominator is that newer tech is "better" than old tech so adjustments have to be made. Put it in a class that it doesn't immediately dominate or bump it up a class (add hp) Not against toyota joining the fun, just want it done fairly. It's all a moot point until the first pass is made, then if it's 1/2 sec off the index and has to start like everyone else, fine. If it's -1.00 out of the gate then yes, adjustments need to be made. You can't factor a 1965 sbc the same as a 5.3ls.
__________________
Jim Miller 103 U/SA |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#10 |
VIP Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Shelby, NC
Posts: 1,819
Likes: 2,162
Liked 2,341 Times in 551 Posts
|
![]()
So, in your world. I can build a 1969 Camaro with a 396/375 that will run 1.20 under and not use one original part in the entire car, that would be OK? But, if I build a new Supra from the ground up using the same rulebook and it runs 1.00, it should be penalized?
__________________
Daren Poole-Adams NHRA Stock/SS 2007 |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|