Automatic Horsepower Factoring System

[bsa633]

Currently looking in a dragster from 86(cajun souvenir iisue) the indexes were almost a tenth lower back then,they lowered them another .1 a couple years later(+.1 extra for A) the National Records were about .7-.8 higher then...we can bitch forever about the parts and pieces... legal or not...but here we are..and the thing is we cant keep adding HP/weight when cars get faster like the system works now...there should be some room for cars to get faster...or we will need AAA and AAAA in the future...

[Dick Butler]

First the indexes can be lowered to make up for all the upgrades. Example start with .5. This still leaves room for credible early racers to race.
There are too many motors currently possible to run to attack this one at a time. I think using punishment for running fast is a killer on Class racing and this Kills interest in our S and SS racing.
One motor could be used as a gauge of hp. Use it and its performance to factor others but there would need to be a decrease in minor variations. There are TOO many 350 Chevy motors to use. Someone always finds another unfairly factored motor to run. I think limiting the combinations would be a good start.
There are too many Classes which allow people to hide a bogus combination also. Limit the numbers of class breaks and consolidate too...

[Lynn A McCarty]

Originally Posted by SS Engine Guy

Thanks for those that took the time to read my long winded post. I am going to look at some numbers and see if I can come up with a suggestion. I really don't think there is one answer to the situation. And it probably won't please everyone. (or maybe anyone).

Part of what I am going to look at is the difference in cubic inches vs. et. vs, factored hp. vs. makers (Ford, GM, Mopar) within several SS classes and see if any correlation exists. This may apply or may not in Stock eliminator. It may offer a solution or it may only cloud the issues even more. The CIC suggestion may apply here, only in a somewhat different way than what is used in comp.
The problems that the AHFS is supposed to address weren't created in a day. I wish that someone had the answer that would make everyone happy, boost attendence, cause younger racers to get interested and migrate towards our catagories, and in general, make this all the fun that it used to be. Might even collect some sponsorship for our classes along the way. This can't be impossible. It will probably be hard but nothing worth having ever comes easy in life. I personally think that the AHFS is detrimental to our sport.

Here are some good equations: (not perfect, but good correlations)

HP(dyno) = 0.285 x CFM x 8(cyl)
0.240 for average bracket engine
0.250 for very good bracket engine
0.285 average factor for SS engine (low compression/high cubic inches a bit lower)
0.300 for high compression comp style engine
0.310 for very good comp engine

funny, where is the cubic inches in that equation?

Cylinder Head Choke Equation
CSA(min) = bore x bore x stroke x RPM x .00353/614(fps)
CSA = minimum cross sectional area of intake port
Choke = point at which velocity impedes horsepower

None of these are perfect, but we have been modeling them for the last few years and they make a lot of sense.

Using cubic inches in Super Stock isnt a good idea. There is a reason Hemis make over 900HP and 455 Olds make 600. If you look at the Choke equation it will tell you why.

[Lynn A McCarty]

Originally Posted by Dick Butler

Lynn, CIC for Stk or SS .

Dick,

I believe that CIC is as screwed up as AHFS. The triggering system is wrong for racing. We must be able as Jack says to predict the potential of the original engine.

This can be done by comparing how racers do with it. If several guys build an engine it should follow a typical bell curve, and that should fall within the limits of other engines. All the highs and the lows will be present, most racer will fall in the average. It will fall in a normal distribution of events. A simple bell curve just like we studied in high school.

If your bell curve is shifted 2 or 3 tenths faster than the average bell curve, your engine HP deserve to be hit. (and not 4HP where it takes 70 years to catch up) It could be because the original HP is rated low, it could be because of a bogus part addition, but it is inescapably skewed.

In a nutshell this prevents the AHFS from focusing on stellar performances by individuals or cheating There will always be fast and slow cars in every combo. Of course we must correct all runs.

[Signman]

Lynn,

Run with your ideas. They make some sense even to me who is statistically challenged.

All runs need to be corrected to sea level to mean anything on a national scale.

My pet peeve is adding excessive weight to a given combo chassis. In some cases that's a lot of weight to carry down track and can become unsafe.

If the factory or NHRA rated HP is low for the actual potential of the combo, as HP is added in small or large amounts, the factor should change moving the combo to a quicker class at the original or realistically adjusted shipping weight. Remember the factor is shipping weight divided by factory or NHRA rated HP.

These are race cars, not tanks, let them run. When a (stretching it) stock car can run really quick it will get attention. And if there needs to AAAAA/SA let it be or just move and thus quicken the class indexes to accomodate.

Don't think this is a new idea but what's the downside other than some change??

Just my .02

[Dick Butler]

Lynn, Compute a couple of current cars and let us know the results and how it matchs the facts of our racing ets. If this IS the equation lets make a list and fill in some other Bogus cars and see their relationship.

[SS Engine Guy]

Originally Posted by SS Engine Guy

Part of what I am going to look at is the difference in cubic inches vs. et. vs, factored hp. vs. makers (Ford, GM, Mopar) within several SS classes and see if any correlation exists.

I agree that cubic inches may not be the best indicator of rating todays S/SS engines.

Don't have an answer yet. I'd like to see the bell curves applied to a few popular classes also.

[lca1971]

SS Engine Guy,

I'm new to the stock/super stock type racing. Just started building a L/S mustang and wanted to add my .02 cent's. I saw in one of your post that you wanted to allow boosted cars in the mix! To bring in youner guy's. Are you wanting to allow toyota's, honda's and the like in the classes? I think that would be very hard to do. The only reason I say this is I ran a 170ci Toyota eng in my 88 Mustang. With a stock long block, almost stock cam's, injectors and a turbo change this eng made 837hp at the tires. This type of combo would kill any stock eli car and most of the SS cars. So I don't think it would work. Epecially with the lack of knowledge of most tech guy's when it comes to computers. The only reason I didn't make the move sooner from "Street Car" racing was the fact I didn't understand all the factoring and indexing. I think that if the younger guy's could get help to understand this there would be alot of them that would want to race this type of racing. I still don't fully understand most of the stuff, but its becomeing clearer.

Thanks,
Chris Atkinson

[Lynn A McCarty]

Originally Posted by Signman

Lynn,

My pet peeve is adding excessive weight to a given combo chassis. In some cases that's a lot of weight to carry down track and can become unsafe.

These are race cars, not tanks, let them run. When a (stretching it) stock car can run really quick it will get attention. And if there needs to AAAAA/SA let it be or just move and thus quicken the class indexes to accommodate.

Don't think this is a new idea but what's the downside other than some change??

Hey Frank,

Nice talking with you at Maple Grove last fall.

There will always problems and issues with any program. Sometimes it creates problems that must be corrected with a sharp guy at the helm. There is no replacement for pure common sense. When a car goes 1.6 under, hitting it 8HP is like a pimple on a charging Rhino.

[Lynn A McCarty]

Originally Posted by Dick Butler

Lynn, Compute a couple of current cars and let us know the results and how it matches the facts of our racing ets. If this IS the equation lets make a list and fill in some other Bogus cars and see their relationship.

Populating this data with uncorrected runs would be against my very being Dick. I am sure all SSers and Sers would agree. Some fundamental visions would have to be established like what is the average suppose to be? Right now AHFS is proposing the average to be the upper limit of 1.15 under. You cannot make your average also your upper limit. I think the S and SS guys see that for what it is.

Here is some explanation on "how it works." Ignor all the technical stuff as computers figure most of that completely transparent to the user. It is like a good driver doesnt need to know how the engine makes power.

http://money.howstuffworks.com/six-sigma4.htm