Re: Class last year?
Ran a single at Etown last year and got $400 and a $50 credit to McLeod and loved every second of it.
|
Re: Class last year?
I resent that comment...lol
Rock |
Re: Class last year?
Was this change ever even mentioned to the drivers council?
Why not announce it last fall before people invested in their combination or a new one? |
Re: Class last year?
I guarantee that NHRA knew/has known about this for a loooooong time just kept nursing it along hoping things either would get better or that the sponsors would forget about it and finally the **** hit the fan and the biggest sponsors(dollar wise) finally said enough is enough we're done and held a gun to NHRA's heads and said fix it now or it's all over. So they hastily thought up something. Guess what they came up with ,a plan that satifies the sponsor at the expense of the racer---- are you surprised??---comp
|
Re: Class last year?
Quote:
:cool: |
Re: Class last year?
Quote:
Why should thje masses know what they only want the chosen few to know. I was complaing about the new ahfs at the PRI show and was told by someone I used to respect. That something like this weas in the works. He smiled when he said it. |
Re: Class last year?
Quote:
|
Re: Class last year?
I've paid as much to any given contingency posting manufacturer for parts on my car in an unpopular class as those in the larger classes - in some cases more since small block Chevy parts are most often far cheaper than the unique stuff. To say I'm not entitled to contingency money because there aren't multiple cars in my class is ridiculous. And since there has never been a focus on the factoring system to balance classes against each other how can you now lump them together as a run-off.
Also I can gaurantee that having 3-4 cars in a class (or even 10) versus a single does clearly demonstrate there is no marketing benefit to that type of car which had a single at a given event. Let take the Fox-body Mustangs as an example. How many of them are there in the world and how many have performance modifications? Its a huge market, has its own section in the Jegs catalog. So why is there only a handful that run in Stock or Superstock? Under the competition structure in most cases there are "better" combinations, but there are diehards that still compete with them due to brand loyalty. Are you saying they don't deserve to be fairly rewarded by the manufacturer for representing their products, that is the intent of the contingency program. If you lump everyone together for one payout you have the eliminator. Or just say you are paying qualifying money, and just skip class eliminations altogether. |
Re: Class last year?
It is not the single car class runs that have driven the sponsors away BUT there are more single car classes because of way to many classes in both stock and S/S . To many classes equals way to many class winners for the sponsors to support with the advertising buget they have in todays economy. Simple math.....What do you guys not understand? Its time to reduce/combine/drop some or just race the way it is and forget about class win money. Theres always the eliminator to win. The sponsors are not posting class win $$$$ just to pay for your entry fees and fuel bills to get to and from the races.
|
Re: Class last year?
Quote:
As for racing an "oddball" combo, I race a 85 5.0 Mustang in M/S, there may only be 5 or 6 other guys running this combination, thats not my fault. I`ll bet that Ford sold many times more 5.0 stick Mustangs in 85 than MoPar sold Max Wedges, or Hemis or Chevy sold 427 Camaros, the fact that many don`t want to run a relative slow car is possible, but considering how many 5.0 Mustangs I see at the local Street Legal races leads me to believe that a 5.0 Mustang is hardly an rare,obscure, oddball car, regardless of how few run them is Stock or S/S. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:55 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.