Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

The difference I was referring to is that I do not have a roll bar....yet.

All Super Stockers require a roll bar at minimum.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

So, why isn't this an issue at the combo races?

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Dunno.

I will say that earlier this year I was at a combo race and in the 2nd round I got paired with the SS/GT Mustang that just won at Indy over the weekend.

Needless to say, I perked up when he came buzzing by me at the finish line.

Thus...the reason I think about the mph difference more with my "bar-less" Stocker.

The bar is going in this winter.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Just make the FS/A index 9.60 and FS/B 9.85, problem solved. Of course FS cars should be subject to AHFS like the rest of us though, that was pretty much a joke but a great marketing technique to guarantee that a boatload of new Chevrolets got to run all out, get lots of spots in the Stock Eliminator field, compete at and eventually win the 60th annual Chevrolet US nationals!

Some numbers to ponder:

-The qualified average for all the FS cars at Indy was -1.255 under.
-The average for all entered FS cars was -1.1985 under, not counting Bill Skillman or Jim Harrison.
-25 of 30 FS cars made the field.

-The average qualified NON-FS stocker was -1.004 under
-33 of the these were factory race cars averaging -1.056 under.
-58 factory race cars made up the field of 128 --> 45% of the field.
-The average for all entered NON-FS, NON FACTORY RACE CAR stockers was -.897 under, not counting Jim Tool. The bump was -.882 under.


And just for the hell of it:
-5 NON-FS cars will get immediate HP today, 3 of which are factory race cars.
-30 NON-FS cars will be subject to review, 17 of which are factory race cars.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

If the manufacturers want the big stage of NHRA Class Racing they need to pony up the ca$h for a separate eliminator, pay for TV coverage and see if it turns into sales. Just a marketing strategy.

The issue with Stock Eliminator in Indy was the the gift of no HP for the Factory Shootout Cars plain and simple.
Bobby's post makes this clear.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Greg

Very good original post Greg.

We all seem to agree that the problem is about "Bogus" hp ratings on the New Cars, Factory Influence (spelled $$$$), lack of enforcement of Stock rules for F/S cars and NHRA not following their own rules, etc.

So what can be done to persuade NHRA to do anything different?? I like the idea of not contributing to their bottom line and staying away from the National Events, but I don't see that happening. Just look at how many attended INDY knowing they had no chance of making the Eliminator, but its their money and time and they chose to go and had a good time.

Who speaks for the majority of us? Who could/would talk to NHRA? Most important is who would listen at NHRA??

Trying to get all the Stock Racers to agree is like trying to herd a bunch of cats, slim chance of that happening.

RJ

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Who says it isn't? :confused: Speed differentials and chassis construction don't know what class designation is on the window, or what event it is. I ran the Turismo at the Spring Fling one year, and ran a car that was close to Top Sportsman territory first round. He wrecked in front of me. If he would've lost it 300' sooner, he would've gone through me. Scared the h*ll out of me.

Rules are minimum guidelines, not maximums. If I were to seriously race the Turismo again, particularly in 1/4-mile country, I would give heavy consideration to putting a roll bar in it.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Amen Charley...!

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Attachment did not upload. Will try again.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

:o You are right. I didn't include the next paragraph which includes the following - that OEM may apply for inclusion of any special production runs. Special runs must be a minimum of 50 units and need not be showroom available.

That being said, if the index for the Factory Showdown cars was lowered and the AHFS system was applied to ALL CARS things would be less frustrating for the racers.

Greg Hill mentioned that Scott Burton just packed up and left Indy. He has a very fast car (B/SA .977 under and 70th on qualifying list) and was scheduled to run Joey Wilkes (same class) who qualified at 1.409 under.

It has been offered to lower the indexes to 9.60 for FS/A and 9.85 for FS/B, good place to start. And implement the AHFS for all.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

I`m curious as to why the factorys didn`t promote their actual production line cars, like the Mustang GT/Boss 302/Shelby, Chevys SS/Z28/ZL1 Camaros, and the various MoPar Challengers.
Factory HP ratings too high?
Not enough exotic/trick factory pieces?
Lack of OE offered Powerglides and Ford 9" rearends?
Factory shipping weights too high?
I always thought much of the challenge of Stock was making the best of the obstacles the compromised factory parts that you had to work with.
It would appear that the "Big 3" have avoided any such nusiances, by creating a bunch of purpose built, max effort race cars, using a blank sheet of paper to eliminate having to deal with any pesky OE production compromise designs. And then by making minor spec tweaks each year, they assure themselves of always having another under rated combination in the wings. Nice. Kinda like a NFL Pro football team beating up on a high school team. . And having somebody come on here to talk about how much time and effort hey have spent to make their new 2014 factory race car competetive against a guy who has been thrashing on his "nostalgia" combo for 20,30, or more years, in a slap in the face.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

RJ, thanks for the compliment. I didn't start this thread to start a fight between the new car guys and the old car guys, I thought we might have some constructive conversation about how to fix the problem. I realize NHRA is probably going to do nothing so I figured if we could star a conversation about how both groups could benefit and maybe it would find its way to NHRA. For the people who don't think there is a problem you are just not paying attention. This is not good for stock eliminator. To advantage one group to the detriment of another group is eventually going to cause the group that is dumped on to do something different. For all you guys with new cars, you desperately need the old cars to hang around, because without them there will be no stock as we know it. There may be something else called stock and you may get enough cars at Indy for a 64 car field, but for most of the other races during the year you won't have enough cars for a 16 car field.

Instead of arguing and calling each other names let's agree that both old and new are important to drag racing and try and figure out how to get more participation from both groups. You could put the new cars in there own classes in stock. When the fuel injected cars had there own classes it brought a lot of the old cars back and worked fine until there horsepower ratings got where they needed to be. The Factory stock class cars don't need to be in stock eliminator if they are not going to follow the same rules. They should have their own eliminator. The complete absence of proper factoring of these new cars has led in large part to the problem of what's going on now and that's no different than what happened when the LT1's and LS1's came out. Both of those combinations have earned themselves around 70 hp. Until the new cars earn themselves the appropriate hp rating they need to be in their own classes.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

$125k spent on a new COPO will get you a great view of Patterson's tail lights.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Boycott the next nationals!!!

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Hi Guys & Gals,

This is my last post on this thread........

NHRA in its bipolar wisdom has, in the past, repaired an error of the same magnitude....

GM came out with the, street legal, in the Classification Guide, FI cars with the obscene low HP ratings to race the lower classes...

NHRA said that the AHFS would fix it. It didn't because they didn't have to go fast to race and they had a very large HP cushion to lean on...

NHRA, it's hard to believe, made the correct decision to put all of the FI cars in their own set of classes. When that happened it forced them to run their cars harder and take the AHFS hits.

After they beat each other up and had realistic HP ratings, NHRA removed the FI classes and put them back into the original class structure that they started in.

Those cars now raced in the appropriate classes..

But being bipolar, NHRA, can't look back and see how to fix this problem because they are blinded by money...

I don't care what they call the new Factory FX cars...

Maybe AFX/SA & AFX/S, BFX/SA & BFX/S, etc and have them race heads up, with the same exact rules for that ALL of the other cars that race Stock Eliminator race under until the HP numbers make sense...

This worked in the past, why not now??????????

Good luck,
Bob

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

as one of the 17 cars under HP review today...i cannot state how pis#$%^d off i am about the 27 cars without review because they are "SPECIAL"....

well i was the oldest stocker to win class, fastest VIN car without a HP debacle in the last 3-4 years... so im under review...

lousy #31 on the sheet > gee thanks NHRA
i am sure glad roy WANTED to be part of the 60th Big Fiasco.

seeyall in columbus about -.54 under :)

captain jack

i did get to beat that mustang II >> HeHe !!!

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

I'm a long time lurker on here and I've seen this pop up many times.

I see a number of questions that I don't think anyone is asking.

Without the package cars how could a late model car ever be competitive? An older engine combination can make big gains within the Stock rules, but a new engine is WAY more optimized for performance as delivered. A new street legal showroom engine combo can never hope to get 1.70 times the rated hp from the showroom to be near the top of a qualifying sheet.

If NHRA decided the new cars had to be factory street legal combos what if they put all the old cars out to pasture? Stock used to be only back to 1960 and I believe that came about in 1972. If they decided that Stock Eliminator was only back to 2002 would that be ok with your sense as to the spirit of the class? One could argue that when that rule was in place it was the heyday of Stock racing. I see many posts about how great those days where, and the cars they were racing were actually fairly new. I can't think of any other motorsport where you could win a "world" championship with 40 year old technology. I can go to a dealer and order a new GM DR head from the performance parts catalog, I cannot order a 369 big block anything. If the factory doesn't support it any longer should it be relevant?

Do you care if the factories are involved? Factories get involved when its marketable. I see a bunch of dealers sponsoring new cars, I don't see them sponsoring older cars so much. If the dealers don't care I wouldn't expect the factories to care. I don't see how racers can have it both ways asking for factory help and contingency money but not running what they actually sell. A window manufacturer wouldn't continue to help someone who bought windows 40 years ago.

Regarding the disparity in MPH between cars what if NHRA decided to put slow cars out rather than move fast cars to Super Stock? The new Dodge Hellcat went 10.80's on sticky tires with an IRS. As a solid axle stocker that could easily be a 9-second car (of course there is no weight break for it currently but we're talking theoretically). I bet a new Camaro V6 can run 13's in total street trim, maybe 11's as a Stocker. It is the National HOTROD Association, and if the slowest modern version of a hot rod can run 11's modified to race is that the new bar?

Is it important to bring new and/or young people into the sport? Is everyone ok with the same people racing the same cars for the foreseeable future? A 16 year old kid who might get bit by the racing bug has only seen LS based Chevies, Modular Fords, and Gen 3 Hemi's. These are the powerplants that are easily available in junkyards and have parts readily available. If the spirit of the class is to be able to build a fast, inexpensive car, with parts that you can get at a dealership then I think a new Mustang is about as cheap as you can get.

Interesting facts:.
2008 Indy qualifying (before the package cars) top ten average model year:1976, on average they were 32 years old! Almost all had carburetors despite the fact there hadn't been a carburated car sold new in the US since 1985 (23 years prior).

2008 qualfying for 1960 Kingswood
#49, U/SA John McCarthy Jr., Lyndon KY, '60 Kingswood 14.073, -1.077

2014 qualifying for 1960 Kingswood
#31 U/SA Roy Dean, Bloomville OH, '60 Kingswood 13.756, -1.094

I like the new cars but I see why there is angst about them. Nothing is perfect. To me it looks like years of not doing anything to keep the classes growing & relevant has resulted in big changes quickly which upsets the norm.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Bob, that would be too much like IHRA. They've already copied IHRA qualifying system. They borrowed Pro-Mod from IHRA and added IHRA's Top Dragster. To turn back the clock and fix Stock might be a little too tuff on egos, knowing that IHRA had enough foresight to leave the carb and injected cars separate...... But then again NHRA's got Pro Stock Snowmobles. - Just saying!

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

LOL......Yeah right.......... like that will happen !

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

You have a good point here. However there is a lot of classic muscle car interest in the USA and it still a strong market for restoration parts. Thanks to NHRA approving certain aftermarket parts, you can buy about everything you need to build a classic "old car" if you want to.

For the record I believe the future of Stock Eliminator depends on having the "new cars" racing and I have no problems with that.

Oh well, at least I didn't build a Pro Stock Truck.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

If this topic is about the FS classes and them being called Stock Eliminator then I like most have a problem with these cars taking qualifying spots at a race like Indy where the quota is full. If you want to call it a Stock Eliminator car then they have to live and die by the same sword as everyone else. Plain and simple, you want to swing for the fence and not have the same consequences as another car that you are going to face in eliminations that's BS.

So the combos that are being reviewed should be able to protest as the FS cars got a freebie and do not get looked at.

Sean

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

I will chime in here on Safety. Go back to Norwalk Div 3 earlier this year....an A/SA and a P car hit at the top end. The A car was torn up very good (mainly because it was mostly.....uh non metal....both drivers where okay, but it should have brought the safety issue to light for many people. I have said to many people, many times it worries me. Since its only Me I can help in an accident that is why I wear a 15 suit, Hans and put a fire bottle in our SS car. COPO worries me more than the Challenger since you can't get out of a COPO with your helmet on if the door won't open.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Proper HP factoring. There is a difference between Advertised HP and NHRA Factored HP. It may take a dash of common sense, and then let the AHFS work to do the rest.

Yes, certainly. And of course they want to be both marketable and competitive. "Competitive" does not mean willfully legislated to be dominant right out of the box. No one has asked that the factory cars carry a 200HP 'penalty' to start with, but nor should they have an immediate 50HP advantage, either. The AHFS took 10 years to bring the underfactored LS cars into line. All people have asked is that common sense be used when introducing new cars.

There's NO doubt that the factory race cars are very cool and very impressive cars in and of themselves -- regardless of indexes or HP factors. They can stand on their own without needing a crutch and would still receive well-deserved attention, fanfare, and accolades.

Then slow cars would cease to compete in Stock, and the financial barrier to entry into Stock would rise. Is this a desired outcome? Alternatively, there is a precedent for cars that do not fit into the Stock classification and spirit of the rules to instead run Super Stock.

"Fast" is relative to the performance potential of the engine/vehicle combination. The 'bar' is the class Index.

Yes, certainly. However, I would argue that $100,000+ factory race cars are not the likely avenue for young people to become involved in Class Racing. More than likely, new young blood will come first via bracket racing before finding their way into Class Racing.

I think people would welcome showroom-available late model cars, just as they have for years. That would require such cars being available in the Classification Guide.

On a separate note, there are plenty of young people involved in drag racing. Most of them I see are bracket racing carbureted small block cars, ranging widely from musclecars to S-10's, Malibus, and fox-bodied Mustangs.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Excellent points, Michael. Very well thought out. I just wish NHRA was on the same "wave length" as yourself. Coming from someone who has been "used and abused" over the years. Back in the '90's, I "took it" from the LT1's and LS1's until their factors got in line, and now I'm taking it from CJ's in D/SA & E/SA that probably belong in B/SA.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Some random thoughts on this thread:

First of all , I have nothing against new cars, technology,.... any racers, factories, factory reps, dealerships or anyone else who took advantage of this situation.
Y'all know who's left, and where the blame lies.

I believe the 50 car special run clause was put in the book to accommodate the aftermarket package installers, such as Shelby and Saleen, not to create a factory playground in S/SS

Remember when there were only a couple of blown CJ packages and 2 hemis out there? Some weren't worried after a few got hit with HP right away.They thought the AHFS would take care of it.
How'd that work out for ya?

The AHFS will not and can not fix this problem. The factory combos don't have the same restrictions as an assembly line combo.. Not emission regs. , No CAFE standards or points to worry about . They can come out with a new package every month if they want. Change a few specs..Start all over again with the AHFS.
Apparently, they have been given carte blanche do do whatever they want, when they want, by you know who.
If ever there was a definition of Factory Experimental, this is it.

Now some want to mandate a change in the roll bar rule for entry level Stockers due to the preponderance of 8 and 9 second cars, further moving the line of who can or who can't afford to participate in, and support Stock Eliminator.
The roll bar rule should be 11.49 and faster..Same as in bracket racing. To require otherwise is demeaning to Class racers. I don't know why others don't get fired up about is.
I run against 9 second cars all the time with my 15 second street car. I f I didn't feel safe, I wouldn't do it . My decision to race or not .I suggest others do the same.

I don't know who these people are who might buy a new V6 Mustang because they watched a blown Factory Experimental run in the 8's ? Are these the same people who think John Force really drives a Mustang?

Guys with the older combos who don't like the current format didn't do yourselves much good by flooding the 60th Nats entries so much that they had to raise the quotas..Just sayin'


What else? I'm sure there's more here to comment on soon.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Not "some". *I'm* the one that brought it up, and I specifically said first that I thought that 8-sec cars belonged in Super Stock, and I also said that if I continue to race my 15-sec Stocker against 150 mph cars I would choose to put a roll bar in the car. I haven't started any petition to NHRA or anything. Sheesh.

I guess you could go by bracket rules and not wear a helmet, firejacket or fire pants in a 15-sec Stocker, too, but I choose to wear them. I felt perfectly safe, too, right up until a car went sideways in front of me in my lane at 140+. :eek: I was just bringing up some self-preservation thoughts. To each their own.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Wasn't referring to you, Michael.
Someone mentioned maybe it was time for all Stockers to have a roll bar. I can't find it at the moment.
Helmet's not a big investment that one has to put into a Dime Rocket to find out if it's worth pursuing..It stays with the driver,,not the car.

"To each their own" My point exactly.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

1. The same way any other production stocker becomes competitive. Someone builds it, flogs it, and makes it work. Oh, and they can get the HP factor reduced if it is not fast enough, too. It's been done that way for decades. You'd be amazed how much potential there is in those engines. And the cars. It has already been proposed to give them a break on the curb weight to allow for the modern "street equipment" that would be removed. The curb weight could be adjusted 300# down (more or less), to account for safety and emissions equipment that would be removed. It is not just the engine that makes a stocker.

2. It would be short sighted on the part of NHRA to make that move. And actually, yes, you can go to the dealer and order all sorts of parts for a 396 big block Chevy, including the heads, the intake, and other parts. Call it a 454 or 427, and you can buy a new block. GM will pay you contingency on the block or the heads for your big block Chevy, or double if you buy both.

3. Factory involvement is nice. It does not have to force everyone to obsolete a car that represents a long term investment in time and money. I have yet to hear anyone say they bought a new Challenger, Mustang, or Camaro because they saw a new factory race car. We did not ask for factory involvement, they decided they wanted to. And that is fine, we welcome them. Some of us have a problem with how they did it, not that they did it, there is a difference. Again, the factory cars would look a lot better to spectators, and to potential new street car buyers, if they were racing each other, most often heads up.

4. So, NHRA is going to be so short sighted as to kick all of the A/S and slower cars out of Stock Eliminator? Not seeing it. Why are we looking at a 13 second V6 Camaro? Why are you attempting to set the bar there? What about the V8 Mustang, Camaro, and Challengers? Did those production street cars suddenly cease to exist? Another problem here, that hasn't really cropped up yet, but will before long, is a 9" tire on a 3500 pound car with 900 horsepower.

5. What young person who is interested in Stock Eliminator has over $100K of disposable income to spend on a new factory car? His own money, not someone else's. Even if he does, the factories are proving that in 2-3 years, they'll make the old combination obsolete, by merely printing off a new engine on a sheet of paper. So, after he spends $100K plus to get started, will he have another $20K for the next combination, and even if he does, will he spend it? Your "16 year old kid" sure won't have the funds to pony up for a new factory car, and odds are, he won't when he is 24, either. The 24 year old might come up with enough to start with a 4-5 year old street car, and go from there. Further, suppose the "new kid" wants to build a newer car, but can't afford a new factory race car? What happens if he decides to build a newer V8 Mustang, Challenger, or Camaro? He runs into the new factory race cars, that's what. Boy, won't that encourage him!

Yes, Jack McCarthy found 0.32 seconds. In SIX YEARS, and you might ask him what he changed, and what he spent. More than one rule has changed since then as well.

The only problem with the new factory race cars is how they have been put in the class, and the special consideration they got. Easily solved by reverting Stock Eliminator back to what it was, a class for real production street cars, and putting factory race cars where they belong, in their own class. No one loses if you do that. Unless you count the fact that egregiously under factored new cars do not get to run roughshod over older cars with legitimate factors. If you feel the $100K plus price of a new factory race car entitles you to a half second plus advantage over older cars, I guess getting your new factory car put in a class where it races cars just like it, is a loss.

Oh, and if anyone wants to talk about Larry Hill's truck, or Gary Summers' Mustang II, (or any other obscure dime rocket) those are old production street vehicles that have been in the guide for decades, someone found the combination in the guide and built one. No one went and had a vehicle that never saw mass production or street use inserted in the guide for them.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Meow !!

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

One thing you Stocker guys might want to consider is unintended consequences. A scenario that I could easily see happening is for NHRA to say "We have listened to our Stock class racers and per their request, we are creating a new separate eliminator for cars newer than 2008." What they are not going to mention is that a proportional amount of the payout and a good chunk of the contingiency money will be going with it. You don't really think that NHRA is going to add a new elimanator and just add the money accordingly? Also, dig out some of your older Natl Dragsters and look how contingiency money has been redistributed over the last few years, money has been added for the new cars at the expense of the older combinations. Don't be fooled by press releases about how the manufacturers are adding contingiency, it's all being feed into the new cars and dropped from the older cars. I race in SS and it doesn't seem to be as big of a deal for us but Stock needs to be careful about what they wish for, I think you guys are being set up.

Jim Caughlin
SS 6019

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

When I sold my Gremlin to Eric Merryfield I asked him to have a rollbar installed in the car
as his daughter and son were going to drive it.He went the extra mile and had a cage and chassis connectors put in it. I would have done it if I kept the car. It's unnerving to have one of the new cars blow by you at around 60 mph. It's only a matter of time till one of them takes out a lower class stocker trying to make it close at the stripe.
It entails buying a jacket,belts etc. but hey how much is your life worth to you?

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Jim, I think what most stock racers would like to see is put the factory hot rods in SS, be it FX or whatever, and add the real stockers to the guide and let the AHFS work. I know Jeff Teuton managed to get Chrysler to add a few to the guide, I'd like to see NHRA pressure Ford and GM to do the same.

Jim Mantle
V/SA 6632

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Bill Lumbergh: Great.
Dom Portwood: So, uh, Milton has been let go?
Bob Slydell: Well, just a second there, professor. We, uh, we fixed the *glitch*. So he won't be receiving a paycheck anymore, so it'll just work itself out naturally.
Bob Porter: We always like to avoid confrontation, whenever possible. Problem is solved from your end.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

FS Fan has a nice post and I'll have to re-read it...Not trying to beat you up on the details,
BUT I think the LAST carbureted Domestic production-line car MAY have been the 1990
Olds full-size Custom Cruiser wagon with the 307 engine...(and Quadrajet)....

Think the rest of the Big-3 had switched to TBI and Port-Fuel Injection by then...not sure
why Olds hung-on with the 4-bbl engine.....

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

one thing not mentioned here, he eventually burned the place to the ground!
lmao

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

That CJ stocker, with the same engine platform and 60 more cubes, almost 15 to 1, 650 roller, cnc modern heads with 150 more cfm, and twice the throttle bore opening only makes 100 more HP than mine?:confused:

I might as well leave my half finished Boss in the garage then.:mad:

Don't get me wrong, I like the new tech just as much as the next guy, but lets get real here. I would like to show the world how smart I am and qualify at the top of the pack too, but how is that going to happen if they don't take a "hit" like I would if I did?

carry on

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

Too many don't recall, or aren't aware, of the stock final in 1986.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

How about. New cars in Stock and older cars in Jr. Stock ??

Just a thought. :)

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

BS. I saw several there, Baytown Dodge had 2. I got one of them.

The new cars are under factored and that's not right.

Re: What's wrong with Stock?
 

fill us in please