Re: Consolidating Classes
 

Didn't think it was worth getting that detailed in a general poll. NHRA FWD classes have already been consolidated amongst themselves with both wider weight breaks and combining sticks and autos. I wouldn't have a problem with combining FWD and RWD classes if there were enough lower classes and there was a way to give them a weight break that put them with an index that made sense. I don't know of a simple way to do that though.

1) Nobody's "pushing" anything. It's a question.
2) I would agree there's been *too* many changes, many of which have generated unintended problems themselves.
3) How would having less classes (presumably ending up with more heads up runs) make it more like bracket racing? It's exactly the opposite.

Why? (Just curious as to your reasoning)

No, it's not. It's for benchracing, where you do most of your racing. http://smileyjungle.com/smilies/signsandflags7.gif Sorry, that one was hanging over the plate. :D Still love ya, Ed!

The topic gets brought up for time to time in various forms. I just don't remember seeing a poll covering it. It is the silly season, after all. We need something else to b*tch about. :cool:

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

What I can't stand are those who bicker over "soft indexes" or "too many classes" after they've hit their performance plateau. Or they bitch that they need "better valve springs" or "allow roller rockers" blah blah blah. The rest of us in the meantime are just trying to get around the performance curve with what we've got within the exisiting rules and class structure. For those who feel things are "too soft" or need more relaxed rules my advice is go buy a couple "For Sale" signs and move on to another more expensive project like a S/S or Comp car, and leave Stock alone. Just my $.02

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

lol

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

'Cause Michael has one. Just ribbing him a little.

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

If FWD cars were to be absorbed into RWD classes, you wouldn't be able to do it stricltly on a weight break basis, for the following reason.

-AF/S, 13.00-15.99 pound weight break. 13.85 Index, 12.95 Nat'l Record.
13 pounds is K/SA, with an Index of 12.65
-BF/S 16.00-17.49 pound weight break. 14.65 Index, 13.67 run at Indy
16 pounds is P/SA, with an Index of 13.45
-CF/S 17.49-18.99 pound weight break. 15.15 Index, 14.17 Nat'l Record
17.49 pounds falls into Q/SA, with an Index of 13.80
-DF/S 19.00-24.99 pound weight break. Index 15.60. 14.66 at Indy 2009
19 pounds is T/SA, with an Index of 14.40
-EF/S 25.00-more pound weight break. 17.45 Index, best runs in the 16.30's
W/S is the lowest class, 24 pound weight break, 16.65 Index

With the exception of EF/S, not one FWD record is even close to the corresponding RWD weight class Index. IF there were consolidated, I would be in favor of adding FWD cars into RWD classes with similar Indexes. So DF/S would be added into V/SA instead of T, and so on with the other classes.

Adjusting weight breaks for all classes (either .75 or 1 pound classes) would be easiest. Not sure how some classes would work where the stick and auto are rated differently, then NHRA would have to get into weight breaks for the autos (or sticks, in some classes), and would be a bih hassle. IF 1 pound classes were made, I'd think a rule of one class only should be written, so a car wouldn't have to try and adjust 800 pounds or more, in the upper classes, to make the currrently-legal three class rule. Natural B/SA (8.50) can run A (8.00) and C (9.00). If the new classes were, say:

A/S - 7.00
B/S - 8.00
C/S - 9.00 etc etc
Then a car could only run it's natural class, and eliminate the need for removing/adding rediculous amounts of weight to change classes. Same with Super Stock as well.

Just my opinions. Personally, I'd prefer it be left alone for a while, and if I HAD to vote, I would go with the altered (3/4 to 1 pound) weight breaks.

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

Stick and automatics should be rated the same. Its the same friggin' engine.

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

I agree.

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

I disagree. Some engines simply work much better with a stick than they do an automatic. Some engines work well either way. Considering the wide variation of bore/stroke ratios, rod/stroke ratios, carburetor sizes, and cylinder head CSA's, just to name a few factors, to say that all engines work equally well with sticks and automatics is simply a generalization that cannot be true, nor can it be supported.

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

Mike, In order to put the FWD's in the other RWD classes properly they would need to drop the HP ratings appropriately. That way the weight breaks would be correct. All the FWD cars would move down some classes to the appropriate indexes.

Re: Consolidating Classes
 

Owen, that would probably work. My shipping weight is 3,444, and the NHRA and factory rating is 170, so I'm a natural U/SA (20 pounds), with a 14.85 Index. I'd only need 13 hp taken off (down to 157), to make V at 22 pounds.

Hope all is well up in NY.