Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

As impressive as all that sounds, it's still a long way (index/dial-in wise) from AA./S to D/S. I stand by my contention that if you REALLY wanted to be second-to-leave, AA /S would be the place to be. Of course, there were no AA/S cars at that time, but there were plenty of A/S cars to consider, then, if leaving second were the defining parameter.

However, I applaud your choice of something other than a '69 Camaro; we have enough of them...

Is you're still interested in leaving second, why not a SS/C, factory 390 race car. I don't keep up with HP factors on those cars, so I don't know if they're still competitive in that class, but they (the cross-ram, 390 factory SS cars) have been more than competitive for an extended period of time.

Would one of those cars not be more of a "second leaver" than what you're building? Just askin'...

Insofar as "smarts-related" factors in picking a candidate for running Stock or Super Stock is concerned, using a rules-based advantage, you HAVE to consider whether that rule might change someday.

Rules do change.

I was aware, when I built my Hydramatic-equipped '57 Chevy, that no such vehicle ever had come down a G.M. assembly line. I KNEW, in 1966 that no sedan deliveries, had ever been built with anything but manual transmissions or Powerglides. But as long as NHRA was accepting Hydros, I was going to take advantage of that glitch in the rules.

So, I did, and raced that car (later, with a partner, Harry Sparks) until the combination was finally banned in about 1971.

At that time, various year, Chevy sedan deliveries, with V8s in a variety of horsepower combinations, held virtually every class record they were eligible to run (and, there were a LOT.) I could see the writing on the wall, and when the axe fell on that (hydramatic) combination, it came as no surprise to me, and having been aware of its bogus status, the whole time, I felt I had no complaints.

That scanario has more than a little in common with your situation, wherein you picked your race car with a rule in mind (second-to-leave) that gave you an advantage. The reason for that "first red light" rule that gave you that perceived advantage, was something that came about as a result of NHRA's inability to deal with changing the rule to a "worse red light" rule (ike the first-breakout rule was changed to a "worse breakout" rule) because the software wasn't available at that time.

We both used rules that were viable at the time, but were both vulnerable to change, eventually.

In that vein, I don't see where you would have any more to complain about that ~I~ did.... we both built our combinations on sandy soil.... legal at the time, but eventually, subject to change.

That may never happen, relative to NHRA's ($$$) mindset, but, it should.

Just my 2-cents....

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

I understand rules change. You asked "who would be hurt" and I gave you an example. I can deal with any rule change. Today NHRA announced a maximum weight rule. Those with ultra-high HP cars on 9" slicks may suffer as a result.
My '70 AMX is not legal with 2x4 induction. That is '69 only with different sheet metal and front suspension.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Just my 2-cents....
__________________
Bill
Last edited by bill dedman; Today at 12:19 PM.

Well I think you owe a dollar three eighty + for this mess and Yac you need to pay up too ! LMAO

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Why would any fair-minded person NOT want a change from a system that deprives the second-to-leave car of red light jeopardy (if the first car bulbs) to one in which EVERYONE has an equal chance to red light, ALWAYS???

They wouldn't.

What would that say about their character?

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Send me a bill!!! LOL!

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Sorry; I knew that...

And on a different tack, guess I'm not a very good communicator.

I apologize. Somehow, the point of my sedan delivery story got lost in translation. I was trying to point out that I had no complaint, when they banned the sedan deliveries, since they should never have been :legal," anyway. Just a fluke... like the first red light rule. It (the rule) was never a product of NHRA tech; it was result of inadequate software development, and should have been rectified when devolpment of that software that could "fix it" came available.

In that vein, I thought it was similar to the sedan delivery mess, and the attitudes of people who were "harmed" by its being laid to rest as an "advantage" would have been like mine... which was, "Thanks for the years of 'unfair advantage it afforded me."

But, it's moot, anyway; it's probably NEVER going to change... I believe that.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Bill, I guess that we will have to agree to disagree. I believe the system is fair. You don't. I'm OK with our differences. Please don't draw "character" of people that do not agree with you, into this.

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

Well sense these aa/s and a/s cars get the same tire on the rear that the slower class car gets to use can they add traction control if the red light rule is changed because now there at a disadvantage on a hot track, when is this going to stop. SOMEBODY PUT A BAG OVER THIS GUYS HEAD!!!!!!

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

I apologize for that remark; and I withdraw it. It was clearly uncalled for, and I am sorry I wrote it.

My bad....

Re: worst red light debate, again!
 

I think I speak for most people when I say..... WHAT????
Put down the bong and repost please. Jim


.