FGT indexes
 

My .02 :confused:

The .25 offset from natural FSS is too strong to begin with. Example - FSS/G is an 8# class, the index is 10.25. FGT/A in 2016 is an 8# class. Its index is 10.00. I realize there is some aerodynamic advantage to a smaller car, but I challenge anybody to take that same engine and weight combo to whatever body they wish, and gain .25 of a second.

So, the new 2017 FGT indexes keep the 8# class at the same index at the .25 offset, but then take it to something that I cannot relate to common sense at all. The worst example is FGT/A - it is a 6# class now posted at an 8.8 index. The exact same engine specs in a "natural" FSS/C car (6# class also) has an index of 9.65. I believe if you took that same engine and weight combo and put it into a dragster chassis, there is no way you could pick up the .85 of the difference in index.

While I do not agree, nor can mathematically justify the .25 offset, I believe it is a complete misinterpretation of the capability of the different bodies to think more can be achieved by just changing bodies.

The FGT/A to C is the major problem in the index's posted, but that's assuming that in the FGT/D on down classes you can pickup .25 going from a COPO body to a 3rd gen camaro body with the engine and weight staying the same.

Just my thoughts... And I am completely aware that the tech guys get paid squat for what they do, and put up with us racers as a bonus. And now in 2017 it seems like there may be less guys...

Re: FGT indexes
 

I agree, Jason. This problem has been evolving (and getting worse) for quite some time now. I think the root of the problem lies in NHRA's attempts to please everybody (though many would argue that they don't care about Sportsman racers). They've tried, over the years, to artificially "level the playing field", by creating things like multiple, almost body style-related indexes (e.g. FWD versus non-FWD). This "everybody deserves to have a fair chance to win" reasoning is noble, but very impractical. The reality of racing (at least from what I've observed) is that some combinations (i.e. car and engine) never have any sort of competitive edge, and others simply lose their competitive edge over time. If the trend continues, there will be 1,000 classes within Super Stock, and your Cavalier will fit into "Red Cavaliers with Nice Graphics and an LS-Family Engine Super Stock/ Automatic". You'll be the only guy in the class, but it'll be "fair".

Re: FGT indexes
 

I'll start by saying my opinion is likely bias because I run in FGT. The whole concept of FGT doesn't make sense to me. They've created 14 new classes for probably 5-8 cars that run these classes across the country! Then, when they did it, we all lost anywhere from .10-.25 on our indexes and not to mention the classes combined sticks and autos.

I'm sure some will argue that the HP factors are the reason for FGT. However, if you look at last years US Nationals, there were a lot of fast traditional GT cars at the top of the qualifying sheet!

Off my soap box...I agree the indexes are messed up! They were from the beginning and even more so for the new 2017 classes!

Re: FGT indexes
 

I agree with all of you. When this was announced, I fought to the end not to add 23 new classes in SS. I know the Div 2 Srac guy has been trying to get Mark Nowicki hit for years and I think he got Glen Gray and Bruce's ears. And I was in one of the lower SS or GT classes and got hit .25 index, had a conversation with them, they agreed to look at it, and the next morning it was in the book. Now you know the "Rest of the Story". I am now back in SS. There are 109 SS classes I think. That is too many.

Re: FGT indexes
 

You guys can't run under the indexes? Qualifying is the only place it makes any difference, and that doesn't pay anything, so what does it matter? You dial under. Who can't run more that .25 under?

Re: FGT indexes
 

Ed, we just want to qualify .95 under with you every race! What's wrong with that? Maybe Trump can help us out!

Re: FGT indexes
 

I'm usually more like .75 under, but what difference does it make?

Re: FGT indexes
 

Now Ed, you know and I know that playing the sheet is a cultural sport. You can qualify where you want when you want, so you do a job I suppose on where you want to be. And sometime you run to the front or try to run to the front (circa 2016 Hillery) and you just can't get there.

Re: FGT indexes
 

You sure about that?

Noble -.949
Gilliam -.915
Tulsa -.704
Ennis -.904
Baytown -.996

Like I said before, we all want to be like Ed. Not to mention, you're always heavy, you run 14 quarts of oil, and you never make a good run!

Re: FGT indexes
 

Lmao

Re: FGT indexes
 

14 quarts? LOL

Re: FGT indexes
 

Ed, are you running an 855 Cummins with all that oil?

Re: FGT indexes
 

Heck, Jeff, I don't know who that is, or what "bad runs" he is talking about? Everybody I run around with runs extra oil & weight to slow down. Pretty sure you do. Might need to work on his stuff.
Do you have a GT car in your fleet?

Hope you and all your guys have a great Christmas!
If I hit the Power Ball, I may see you next year. Otherwise, I'm probably all done. Always enjoyed visiting with you and Kevin.

Re: FGT indexes
 

This conversation is more than 2 years too late. I've never cared about having some magical fantasyland "level playing field" -- some cars are better than others, period. What I *DO* care about is equal application of the rules. Creating more and more classes to separate everyone out is ridiculous. Everybody knows that the Factory cars were ridiculously underfactored out of the gate. It was all politics, and a lot of people pretended to defend them. Since they couldn't factor these cars in the right zip code for fear of said politics, they got their own classes -- so whether they meant to or not, racers helped create this problem.

From the point of "well, if they HAVE to have their own classes...", they screwed up again. Combine Sticks and Automatics? Fine, then do it for everyone. There are existing classes in SS that run sticks and autos combined, and autos get a weight break. If they get it, so should other classes that run under the same sticks & autos combined format. If they *don't* get the weight break, FINE, then take it away from the other classes as well. I honestly don't care which way it is, but PICK ONE. On top of that, the indexes got hit more for some classes, less for others.

Then came the "safety rules", where NHRA in it's infinite wisdom magically determined that 10-11 seconds cars that involved either a Factory body or Factory engine were unsafe, and now require a full roll cage, competition license, -5 firesuit, SFI flexplate & trans shield, REGARDLESS of class or E.T. The idea that you can go 10.00 without all that with a carburetor, but need all of it to go 11.00 with anything Factory related is purely asinine. Additionally, it creates a concern for the insurance company: "Why does this faster car have less stringent safety requirements than this slower car?" That also goes for having different safety requirements for the EXACT SAME CAR at different events. Safety specs should be based on E.T., MPH, and chassis construction, period -- all classes, all cars, all events (includes class racing vs bracket racing). Physics does not change.

To add more pieces of straw to the camel's back, the runaround I got for two years when trying to have a rational conversation with numerous officials in power was absolutely staggering. (and I conducted myself far more calmly, succinctly and professionally than I am here... I no longer care) It went far beyond the "I don't know" and "Hm, never thought of that" and "Let's run it up the next level of bureaucracy" that it started out with. The last straw was dealing with a complete ignoramus who literally refused to even acknowledge the question that I asked, who talked down to me, insisted he didn't see where I competed in XYZ class (despite having won multiple NHRA events with it), then went into some bizarre sidebar that had nothing to do with the issues at hand. I would have FIRED that moron on the spot.

I will only bang my head against the wall so long. I quit running NHRA this year specifically due to the unequal application of rules and the actions and attitudes of certain high-ranking officials. I've taken my money elsewhere. The only reason I even bring all this up again is in wondering where was everybody the last two years?

Re: FGT indexes
 

I've been asking about this for at least 10 years. I've never gotten past the first level of communication.
Mr. Bracket racer (@ 11.50) does not need a roll bar, but Mr. Beginner, wanting to try Stock Eliminator with his (12.85) Mustang , needs a roll bar, jacket, pants, 2 year belts, etc.
Besides making no sense , it's not conducive to bringing in new blood.

Re: FGT indexes
 

You must have "Cat Scratch Fever!" LOL. How much for the motor?

Re: FGT indexes
 

I would probably sell the whole car.