Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Shelby,
Congradulations on getting the the year limit cutoff pushed back. I for one think the 55-59 models are some of the best looking cars ever made and are as responsible for the success of drag racing as any other era of automobiles. These cars were truly the beginning of 'stock' cars being bought to drive on the street and to be raced on the weekends, and as such it is only fitting that they should be allowed to compete in Stock Eliminator. Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
I wonder if we will see Dave Boertman in a '59 Chevy again?
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
I seem unable to asertain whether or not NHRA will also release the engine specs on 55 thru 59, Fords, Buicks, Oldsmobiles, Pontiacs, etc. If they do not, as I believe they won't, then this matter is mute, in my opinion. I will be sorry to see that happen, but understand that NHRA still has the specs on Studebakers, Fords, etc. and could really make it interesting!
Fred |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Iwould think of the worst foul rule as drag racing welfare.I don't need it.I think the pressure
of being the first makes me a better racer.Not necessarily a good one ,but a better one than I think I would be. Why does everybody want to keep changing the rules?We need to change NHRA's attitude towards enforcing them.The rule book,if followed correctly is pretty damn good as it is. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
The only reason mine doesn't hurt is because I haven't been able to afford racing much these last 2yrs (changes to that are in the works)...trust me if I could afford a faster car, I'd be shopping for one...my car may be competitive against the faster stockers as things are now, but it's more successful against imports in bracket racing. Someday one of my dream Mopars (or a Jody Lang type Malibu), will grace my budget, and then I'll have a chance to be both the tortoise (I don't think that's the correct spelling?), and the hare... |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
jack matayas... you do remember i had the rule changed to allow 3 speed automatics in 1957 - 1961 full size chevys due to the 3 speed turboglide ... only high HP 348s and 6 cylinders cannot use the 3 speed.
jack mccarthy why the stupid valve spring rule ? |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
If you limit the older combos and the factory specs on the new cars are somewhere near the front end coil spring #s on my car,then you hurt the older combos even more than they are now.Can someone explain this in a rational manner? |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Ed,
In reference to your comment, "Why does everybody want to keep changing the rules?" Keep changing the rules? KEEP CHANGING THE RULES??? This rule is FORTY SEVEN YEARS OLD!!! Has never been changed! At the time it was instituted, there was a similar rule: "First car to 'break out' loses." I don't know if you were racing back then, but I was. They (NHRA) figured out how to fix that situation very quickly, and did. They probably would have fixed the first red light rule at the same time, but did not have the necessary software, yet, so they buried it . Over the years, people got used to it. I know I did. It took several hours of thinking about it (after having it explained to me by a guy who was a lot smarter than I am) for me to "get it." That's how buried in tradition, I was, But even ~I~ eventually "got it." They had buried it by never trying to change the "so-simple-a-cave-man-can -understand-it" FIRST RED LIGHT LOSES in a handicapped race, even though the software to alleviate this obviously unfair situation has been around for years. Why? NHRA is run by a bunch of .....well, lets just say that unless it's going to benefit them, monetarily, they simply have no interest in doing it... It wasn't always that way, but it's been that way for a while. Would you like to RETURN to the original "First Car to Break Out" system, and keep it, on the same basis that you think this red light business can continue to be swept under the carpet, under the the idiotic rationale of "That's the way it's always been???" No.... I wouldn't think so. It's the same situation, you know... same concept. Then, let me get this straight: you want to keep the "worst breakout loses" rule, but defy logic by NOT changing to a worst red light rule... Explain the logic of that one for the folks, if you will, please. I know you will..... oh yes, you will!!!! It will be an explanation devoid of logic because there's only one way you operate in a scenario like this; kill the messenger! Personal attacks, snide comments about the person who disagrees with you and anything pejorative or derogatory that you think will supplant logic and an overview of sportsmanship or fairness, but that's your way of fighting the issue, if there's "no way out." And, there's not.... I'm waiting. :) |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Why is it that the following is considered unfair or nonsensical?
Everyone shall have an equal opportunity to red light. As the starting line system is a basic fundamental, EVERYONE must take a shot at the tree. No one shall ever deprived of an opportunity to red light. Or, wouldn't this make as much sense as the current situation: The LAST car to red light shall always be the loser. If you are always the LAST car to leave and find this unfair, then simply learn how to drive and don't redlight. Or, build a slower car. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
I'd love to see some data on how many races that rule would have affected. Problem is that a lot of fast cars, when giving a big enough spot will just leave when they see their opponents red light, that would skew the numbers. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
I think the return of the 57 chevy to stock is great, think about how these cars helped mold the face of sportsman racing from Jr. stock on, look at the people that have raced one. like my hereo's Jimmy Waibel, Bob Dennis, Charlie Cason, Bruce Wilkerson and many many more. I am looking to see about rebuilding dads fugitive with the big W on the door. just to be able to run one has been a dream of mine not to mention the speeds they ran in the day with only 7" tires wow what can they run on 10" tires. my big question is how many will be built as a stick car like they were?
Jeremy Waibel K&N Filters 69 Camaro B/SA |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
Plain and simple,you don't race S/SS now.Except for a few key board racers the system seems to work very well I can't believe you actually gave this subject hours of thought.Must have put a real strain on your old tired brain. I have no problem with the red light rule as is and I never will.I also think the breakout rule is correct as written. So Bill,go back to your bracket racing friends and tell them just how stupid and stubborn those S/SS racers are for not changing the rules to your liking.And do as Chad suggested.Get your local track to implement them in your bracket program. From a kinder and gentler Ed F. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Jeremy, I remember your Dad runnning the "57" at Phoenix City in the early 60's but I don't recall if it was a 4 spd.???.
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Larry: Thanks, we appreciate it; we actually just redid the paint job on the car this past winter and we were surprised ourselves that the color combination turned out as good as it did. Dad wanted to bring back an older nastagia looking paint job with the stripes.
Michael: Thanks, I couldn't agree more Thanks Again! |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Ed, I knew you wouldn't disappoint me! ("I see they let you out of the asylum again hey Dedman?")
You also didn't disappoint by admitting that you're amazed that I actually spent hours thinking about the red light rule. You obviously haven't spent enough time thinking about it, because you still don't understand it. You say you agree with the breakout rule as it is written. I think everyone does, but it wasn't always written this way; it had to be CHANGED to get away from "first car to breakout, loses" to the rule we have, now. Time to change the first redlight rule to match it. You wouldn't want to race under inconsistent rules, would you? Or would you? In your last post, you imply that I am in an insane asylum, yet you offer nothing but your own opinion when faced with the problem of presenting a logical argument as to why the antiquated, unfair and easy-to-fix red light rule shouldn't be changed. I said that type of response would be your choice (you can look it up), and you came through for me!!!!! The more things (about you) change, the more they stay the same.... Thanks, Ed~ :) |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Jeremy, did I not see your dads 57 chevy painted on the den wall at his house in Lakeland? FrankChastain
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Why not have baseball 5 strikes you out or have football closest to the goal after 4 downs each gets the TD, lol . Drag racing is fine ,don't need to re- invent the wheel ,just fix the flat and go.
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
I like the break-out rule the way it is. As far as the red light rule, here is my suggestion (just a suggestion people). How about extending the tree blocker all the way down to cover the red-light bulb and then the worst red-light loses? I believe the red bulb does cause a distraction to the faster car, especially in a 1-3 bulb handicapped race. The scoreboard would not light up until the second car leaves and the computer determines which light is "more red" so that wouldn't be a distraction either. The code for that loop would be simple to write, we were taught how to write a similar program during my freshman year at college. Rules would stay as they currently are on a bye run, automatic win, no red light or break out in a bye run. Again, this has nothing to do with "first guy to break out loses.." Comparing these two rules is apples and oranges.
Secondly, just from being the chaser in bracket racing to getting chased like a gang member in Super stock.. anyone who is even attempting to say that slower cars have an advantage in a drag race should really think through their hypothesis again (or must really have eyes in the back of their Simpsons). The whole race is in front of you, and currently you have the red light advantage working in your favor. Now I can't defend the slower car who never references his/her opponent and breaks out while said opponent is parked at midtrack but I am 99% sure a faster car has never gotten around a broken car at halftrack and neglected to lift. "Build a faster car" is not the answer people want to hear, especially people who care about preserving great classes that go beyond SS/AM or AA/SA. But not seeing a "true tree" in my opinion, is only a small (and easily corrected) sacrifice for the advantages that lie ahead for the next 1320 feet. Don't forget being the faster car, my friends, is the reason we have that idiotic tool known as a throttle stop in all the super index classes. :( Lastly, after I've probably just pissed off a few people! I know it's a bit early but I was wondering if anyone from the east coast has thought of making the trip to Pomona for the Winternationals in February. Please let me know if you have any extra room in your trailer and how much expense money you would like. God bless. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
1) Guys with the faster cars 2) Busy bodies without a class car 3) No names Maybe us "slower" guys in S/SS are just happy being out there racing. Maybe to shut them up NHRA could block the whole tree.What would they want next?Maybe a 10' wall extending down the track for 100' so they could have their Holy Grail: a clean tree. Where does it end? |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
Wade |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Here's an off-the-wall idea (or maybe not).
This was proposed several years ago for bracket racing (It may have been by the late Steve Taylor). Best total package wins, and there are no more redlights or breakouts ever. Just the closest total package to .000 wins. Example: Me, in DF/S, dialed 15.05. An opponent in a B/SA dialed 10.50. My reaction time -.002. Opponents RT .010 My ET 15.048. My opponent 10.512 My total package is -.004. Opponent is .022 Under the proposed system, I would be the winner, since my total run was closer to perfect (.000 package) than my opponent's. That should get some opinions flowing. As for the worst redlight, it would be of great benefit to me to see it changed, as I have always been THE slowest Stocker on the property at every race I've ever ran at in my career, except four ('04 and '06 Dutch, '02 Delmar and '02 Atco LODRS). If NHRA/IHRA were to go to the worst redlight loses, hey, great. It would be of help to me and all slow cars. I'd be in favor of it. If they don't change it, I am ok with it, too. Would it bring me out of retirement if it was changed? No. NHRA and IHRA have much bigger overall issues that I have a problem with than the redlight rule. If they were to fix those, then maybe you'd see me back. Yes, the current redlight rule does favor the faster car, but I knew the rules coming in, fair or not. This argument comes up once a year it seems (usually by Dedman). One can make the argument for and against both the slower car, and faster car, and who has the advantage. Faster car: -gets to leave last -has the race in front of them the whole way -has a car that is not affected as much by weather/wind changes -has parts readily available more so than some slower/older cars Slower car: -gets to leave first with no distractions -a slow(er) car will usually hook better, and is not totally dependant on a good starting line -usually costs less than a big-block or late model fast car -likely has a softer HP factor and can run further under (in some cases) That's the beauty of Class Racing. There is something for everyone. Bracket racing artists, go-fast guys, record chasers, whatever tickles your fancy. Stock has 51 (now 52 in 2011) classes. S/S has many more (80+, I believe). Almost anyone can find something to race, based on personal preferance. Why people constantly want to change it dramatically is beyond me. If it is in the intent of being safer, more cost-effective, and in the spirit of fairer competition (whether it's putting the new cars in FX classes, reducing HP for older cars, changing the redlight rule, etc etc), I am 100% in favor of it. In the grand scheme of things, my opinion(s) don't mean jack squat. I don't race anymore, and don't intend to in the near future, unless things change within the sanctioning bodies. Then I can again become a current racer and can have ACTUAL input. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Eddie, it wasn't MY idea. Just repeating something I heard several years ago and wanted to see racers reactions, for the fun of it.
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Some things to ponder...
1. The worse red light rule would hardly ever come into play, as that is a rare situation (worse red light by the second car to leave,) Most of the time, it would go totally unnoticed. 2. This rule change is NOT necessarily about slow vs. fast cars. It applies to EVERY race that is not a heads-up run. Any dissimilar classed cars, such as an A Stocker vs. a B Stocker, or a K Stocker vs. an L Stocker.... The tendency is to think that it's just a benefit for lower-classed cars, but it would benefit virtually EVERYONE who runs a handicapped race in that they could no longer lose to a car with a worse red-light infraction than thery had. 3. No "driving adjustments" would be necessary because no red light would come on before the second car had left the line. In short, there's no logical reason NOT to change it that I can see. The contention that if you have a higher-classed car, and you are racing against. say, a T Stock car, and the T Stocker red lit, you'd be on the converter, waiting for the green a longer time, is a pretty weak argument against this rule change, considering the benefits. The only competitor who could NOT ever benefit from this rule change would be any car in the top class. He'd lose the built-in advantage of the present situation, wherein EVERY CAR HE RACES in a handicapped race is faced with redlight jeopardy before he is. He'd lose that unfair advantage. Don't you think that everyone racing should have an equal chance to redlight? This system would provide that. What we have now doesn't work that way; the second car to leave never has a chance to redlight if the first car turns on the bukb. That sucks. It's sucked since 1963, when they didn't have the software to fix it, like they fixed the original first car to breakout rule. Time to get rid of this antiquated unfair system. Ed,if you can't understand that, you simply need to think about it a while longer... you'll get it, eventually... like you did with the "worst breakout" rule that you're okay with. Same deal... I know you don't want to return to the original "First car breakout loses." |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
It's an inequity, either perceived or real, and all inequities, no matter how small, whether real or perceived, must be remedied, life must be made fair, it's an imperative. :rolleyes: After all, there are no bigger or more important issues in NHRA, or class racing, than this one. Especially if you aren't even racing in a class. :eek: |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Bill says that the worst redlight rule would hardly ever come into play, as this is a rare situation and most of the time would go totally unnoticed. So I decided to see how many times this has occured at National events this year in Stock. Listed below are the events and which races were involved:
POMONA- Denysenko C/SA -.007 Totaro B/SA -.021 WON Irving O/SA -.033 Wong F/SA -.044 WON GAINSVILLE- King E/SA -.032 Feist B/S -.052 WON Freeman V/SA -.023 Kenny A/SA -.052 WON Hidalgo D/SA -.021 WON Parker H/SA -.008 ST.LOUIS- Cradduck AA/SA -.010 WON Richardson C/SA -.003 ATLANTA- Campbell R/SA -.003 Robbins H/SA -.032 WON BRISTOL- Bennett D/SA -.017 WON Marshall G/SA -.009 Faulk C/SA -.087 WON***** Livingston J/SA -.135 Mattingly C/SA -.013 WON***** Beeler G/S -.500 Miller E/SA -.023 WON Robbins N/SA -.014 SEATTLE- Hill A/SA -.021 WON***** Davison I/S -.254 Cry AA/SA -.019 WON Method B/SA -.002 SONOMA- Rayburn I/SA -.009 WON***** Stewart J/SA -.013 DENVER- Holzman AA/SA -.049 WON Neugebauer D/SA -.032 BRAINERD- Rennquist F/SA -.037 WON Line J/SA -.003 Bredemus B/SA -.057 WON DeMenge E/SA -.025 DALLAS- Hidalgo Sr. D/SA -.012 WON Bannister F/SA -.010 READING- Massafra E/SA -.007 WON***** Sepanek I/SA -.023 The wins with the stars beside them de-notes the faster car red lit the least amount. So we have 19 races and if the worst red light rule was in effect, 14 cars would have advanced to the next round because they were the better driver up front. Instead, they went home. Of these races, the won who benifitted the most by not having the worst red light rule was Kevin Cradduck. His round 3 redlight was negated and he went on to runner-up. Good job Kevin! Hope you found this interesting. Danny |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
That rule would of put in the finals at least 3 or 4 times :)...I'm all for it !!!
|
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
My guess is it isn't squat. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. I bet you are right that it is a very small percentage of all rounds, but I bet it is a much larger percentage of rounds that at least one car went red.
That is like saying that the number of double breakouts would be a small percentage of total stocker rounds, but it is a much larger percentage of rounds that had at least one breakout. See my point? I can see the argument for the worst red light looses just like the worst breakout looses. It would make the starting line as even a playing field as the finish line. Don |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
I don't remember if I asked Kevin if he knew Edmond went red. Maybe I'll remember to ask him tomorrow night in the shop. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Thanks, Danny; that was a lot of work, and very interesting. Alan is right, though; lots of faster cars will just leave before their green light comes on if they see red in the other lane. But, we have no way of knowing how many. To my way of thinking, since nobody seems to be able to come up with a good, logical, legitimate reason NOT to change it, I'd say if it's even ONE INSTANCE of somebody losing a round to a worse red light offender, that's one too many... because it's totally unnecessary.
If you have a flawed system, you live with it if there's no way to change it (like was the case in 1963), but when a fix comes available, does it make any kind of sense NOT to fix it just because there are other, more pressing problems? Can NHRA multi-task??? Can they SINGLE-TASK??? LOL!!! This red light rule is not an important issue on the level of the idiotic AHFS, nor the absurd horsepower factors of the blown Mustangs, and the DP cars, but it's something they could change while they're THINKING ABOUT the bigger problems. If someone can tell me a good reason just to leave it alone, I'd sure like to hear it. So far, I haven't heard one. Of course, since this procedural change won't make NHRA a red cent, it very likely will never happen. Thanks for listening. |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
I'm pretty used to having the faster car (when I have my car running at least), and I'll say once I see a red light in the other lane my concentration is broke and I just let it fly. My thought is "yipee" and I don't really care about a reaction time at that point.
One point that hasn't been brought up about this. If you demand a worst red light rule then you need to block the tree from your opponents view all the way past the red light. But for the record, I'm adamantly against any such proposal. Last question - Of those wanting this rule, how many are the same ones that bitch about changing the rules all the time? My guess it's a significant amount. That being the case (my assumption), what other rule can I propose while your at it? |
Re: 2011 Stock/Super Stock Rule Changes
Quote:
BTW, not just you but everybody should be! |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:39 AM. |
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.