CLASS RACER FORUM - A/SA heads-up

CLASS RACER FORUM (https://classracer.com/classforum/index.php)

- Stock and Super Stock (https://classracer.com/classforum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)

- - A/SA heads-up (https://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=24721)

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes (Post 178284)

need to see incrementals to make an assumption. but i don't think 134 is all its got

I think for sure that there is more in it. I just think that this particular pass is pretty honest.

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUMP (Post 178291)

I think for sure that there is more in it. I just think that this particular pass is pretty honest.

well it wasn't a heads up run, and he's not an idiot. A few strokes of the keyboard and I'm sure he can pick it up or slow it down at will, and make it look honest.

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes (Post 178301)

well it wasn't a heads up run, and he's not an idiot. A few strokes of the keyboard and I'm sure he can pick it up or slow it down at will, and make it look honest.

It's no different than changing jets and timing in your car. The other "tricks" are the same too.

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Ficacci (Post 178086)

I had to take a shot so I tried some things and it slowed the car up. Doug made a good pass, and beat me.

Going back to Nitro Joes stats through 2006, I've always had a car in the top 10 in either A or B so I think my car runs pretty decent. I never had a heads up race where I didn't feel I had a legitimate shot, until today.

I don't fault Doug or anyone who races a CJ or a Challenger. I do however put the onus on NHRA to factor these cars correctly, and they have failed miserably.

To watch a car in your same class ride the break pedal from the 1000' mark all the way to the finish line is discouraging and a slap in the face.

This may sound like sour grapes to some, but for those who have put the time, effort and money into your cars as I have and to be mitigated to a middle of the pack car by the swipe of a pen, I'm sure you can relate.

I have no problem relating to that! For years I have watched your sucess with the L88s L78s and its fueled my passion for my own R&D engine program, and Iam the first defender of the old school big blocks, but maybe it time you put the same work ethic into lets say a late model LS7 vette for A/S, oh I forgot where talking about NHRA here like their going to let that run.

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Hill (Post 178156)

Dave that is well said. Thanks to NHRA you never had a chance, and you have a Great Car. What car can beat one of these new DP or CJ? Defrank, Hawk, Shaul, Corda, Wilkes, West, Wann, Cooter, Boudreau, Boburka, Sorensen, Latino, Pendarvis, Russo, Koppein, Barton??? By the time they get them factored to where they need to be, I'll be dead! And I'm only 39 and holding!

Larry

Larry you have summed it up just about perfectly. For some reason the NHRA has let these cars in with ridiculous factors and we WILL BE DEAD by the time they get things corrected.

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Fuller (Post 178534)

Larry you have summed it up just about perfectly. For some reason the NHRA has let these cars in with ridiculous factors and we WILL BE DEAD by the time they get things corrected.

I keep hearing that but well the 6.1 is up for review, it has already had HP added, it can only run in A and AA now.

The 08 CJ Can only run AA now.

We plan on running the 5.7 to its natural home and I believe that to be B, just an uneducated guess. But were not running 1000 footers, or planning on pulling it in anyway.

I know 2 others out there, Doug who has been mentioned and Irv Johns, well I really dont see either one of them laying down.

Im not being a prick Im being serious when I ask this, what timeframe would be acceptable to see the HP rated up and to what ?

Im curious its a question Ive never asked, I hear that the HP is unfair, etc. but noone I have seen gave and answer to what they think it should be.

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by drooze (Post 178573)

Im curious its a question Ive never asked, I hear that the HP is unfair, etc. but noone I have seen gave and answer to what they think it should be.

6.1L should be 415-425 to start with. Even that may be a tad soft.

5.7L should be, at minimum, 385.

5.9L should be around 350.

CJ's should be 450+.

This is just my own personal opinion based on what (little) I do know about the engines and their respective performances. I think the cars would still be competitive at these ratings, but not dominant like they are now.

BTW, Drooze I have no doubt that you'll run the car out every pass.

Re: A/SA heads-up

WAaaaaY soft on the CJ

Should be 500

Re: A/SA heads-up

Quote:

Originally Posted by junior barns (Post 178680)

WAaaaaY soft on the CJ

Should be 500

Yeah, you're right. 450 is soft, but 500 seemed a little stiff at the time.

A rating of 475 would put them about 300 lbs over where they are now. That would level the field but still give them SOME room to show what they're holding back. It's a start anyway.

Re: A/SA heads-up

What criteria would you consider the basis of comparison between engines? Ignore the supercharged cars (though I know you can't).

Say that the baseline for A/SA is the 69 427 Camaro. NHRA ratings are 425HP with OEM heads and 435HP with aftermarket heads.

This calculates to an NHRA rated HP/cu in ratio of 0.995 and 1.019 respectively.

Now the 6.1L - 370 cu in / 385 HP current rating. This translates to a ratio of 1.041

Per the intial factoring this would indicate that the 6.1L engine should produce a ratio of 1.02 times the power of the 427 or 2% more power per cu in displacement than the combo that has been developed for 40 years. Since the 6.1L is blowing the doors off the Camaro's we know this number is higher.

I am sure it is true do to better cylinder heads, intake manifold and much larger TB. If there were proportional restrictions made for head port size (well out of NHRA's control since this is base engine design) and TB sizing (something NHRA could have regulated) then these engines could have been more equal from the onset.

Bumping this engine all the way to 415 or 425 HP - may be a little harsh, saying that they will outperform the capabilities of the developed combination by 12-15% at their introduction but again there is far too little data to support it not being true either. Not having any data on the combustion chamber efficiencies, pressure drop measured in the ports/intake, its hard to say what the proper ratio of power output per cu in should be when comparing the two different engines.

Again there are many software packages that could take data that is already required for blueprinting these engines with a few extra data points for head flows, etc and evaluate the power potential of the new engines and then properly scale them to align to the established combinations.