hey len !!!!
 

Hey Len ,,did,nt hear back fron you on my post about throwing the fuel---injection cars back in with us carburated car,s, think this need,s soom explanatoin ???? like i stated earlier how about the aro-dynanic,s, the E -shift ect.. ? WE WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE ,, WHAT MAKES NHRA THINK THIS WILL BE FAIR NOW WHEN IT WAS,NT AND THEY SPIT IT UP BEFORE ????? MAKE,S ME SCRATCH MY A?? AND WONDER .... DENNIS DUNLAP J/SA SSGT/MA

Re: hey len !!!!
 

I have ran 3 carb cars,,,and 3 fuel injected cars,,,,it depends on the combo,,,,,,,,2 of the 3 FI cars were greated affected by bad air and elevation,,,, 2 of the carb cars were not,,,,,,1 was drasticly,,,,,,1 carb car slowed down over .50 running it at 100 degrees water temp and 65 degrees outside at an actual elevation of 300ft,,,,,,,,to 140 water temp,,,,80 degrees outside temp,,,,,,,,


on the other hand ,,had an oldsmobile that woundnt slow down but .02 from an outside temp of 65 up to 85 outside temp

the statement of Fi cars not moving around in et is not exactly correct,,,,the camaro, which had the f.a.s.t. system wouldnt move around hardly any if the A/F ratio was set to a lean condition,,,,,BUT,,,,the cavalier would change if it THOUGHT the outside temp would drop,,,,,so that like comparing apples and oranges

now,, the mustang ( FI) would run 8.3`s at the rock and 8.8`s at bristol,,,,,while the olds (CARB) would run 8.0`s at the rock and 8.1`s at bristol,,,,,

just depends on combo,,,,I wouldnt depend on that reason to justify not combining classes

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Well here is a thought on FI vs Carb........

The GT/MA record just got set.....10.66 with a '95 Chev FI 265 cu in

Now, how fast in GT/MA with a '55 Chev Carb 265 cu in ??

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Well, ya "hadtobethere" to see the lil' 265 FI sucker run. Fast piece!

Jerry

Re: hey len !!!!
 

1 1352 B/SA Bill Hawk, Manassas VA, '67 Shelby 10.092 11.55 -1.458
2 1441 A/S Richard Adkins, Willingboro NJ, '67 Shelby 9.867 11.30 -1.433

From MIR this spring. These guys can keep up with the FI if they want to, but most are scared of the slap on the wrist.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

If the carb cars are going to run with the injected cars wouldn't it be reasonable to put a realistic weight on the late model cars? Compare a 1968 Camaro stocker which weighs very close to the real shipping weight to a 1988 Camaro that is at least 400 pounds lighter than the REAL weight of shipping. How the weights got out of control is not a big deal until the 68 with it's obvious disadvantages has to run heads up.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

great example...but those arent stockers...they are modified production!!

Re: hey len !!!!
 

b/sa 633, that,s the best description i,ve heard so-far....nicely put !!!!!!!!!!!! dennis dunlap j/sa ssgt/ma

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Dennis,
Several reasons why the switch back:

1- The original split was to allow the EFI cars to compete against each other and level out the HP factors.
2- When NHRA created the EFI specific classes, the thinking was that eventually we would blend them
back into regular stock after they leveled out against each other.
3- Design inequities will always be an element of Stock category racing. This is why Stock Eliminator is
categorized by weight vs horsepower with the element of weight being adjustable based on actual
performance.
4- There are a number of racers that I am sure would gladly debate the consistency factor with you.
5- NHRA has too many classes in Stock (75) and Super Stock (85) eliminator categories. Eliminating the
EFI classes reduces the overal class count by 26 classes.
6- To include or not include EFI cars back into regular Stock has been an ongoing debate among
racers since the inception of the classes. When you look at ALL the elements, such as those
listed above and what is best for the long term growth of this category putting EFI cars back into
regular Stock made the most sense to NHRA and arguably many racers.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Thanks, Len Here is a good example 1969 Camaro 325hp 396 VS 1997 Camaro 350 LTI

Both fit in E/SA

1969 3420lbs
1997 3530lbs

Both have a 3 speed

1969 396 cubic inches
1997 350 cubic inches

1969 700+ cfm Q Jet
1997 600 cfm throttle body

You tell me what looks better!

Re: hey len !!!!
 

FI works better

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Tommy you forgot the:

Aerodynamics
Torque arm Suspension (on F-bodies)
Weight distribution
Rollererized engine components
Evolution of technology will benefit the FI cars more than a car that's been beat on for 40 years...
One is a steel head and steel manifold big block..one is an aluminum head aluminum manifold small block.

Oh wait..they are advantages for the FI car and you seemed to have left them out

Re: hey len !!!!
 

FI works better? Better than what? Is that why every N.A. comp car that has tried it has switched back to carbs? Or why Pro Stock has not switched? The carb will cool the fuel making more power. The FI fires the fuel in right at the port not on top of the manifold letting it cool. I will say after you have spent hours testing on a dyno and on the track the FI car is simpler to make a change with the laptop than disassemble the carb. But You have to have done the testing to know what change to make. And yes I have raced both and won with both.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

1969 cougar 428...3,750#...best 60 foot 1.45 [footbrake 3,000] . Fi Firebird -Camaro normal 60 ft.1.35 and better. Not a horsepower issue,a suspension -wheel base one. Bart

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Fred I will agree on the aero and the roller engine is a better deal. But is it better then 46" and 100 cfm?
PS I dont think Private Ryan's A/FIA Could hang with Fred Henson's A/SA 9.80's Pretty stout! All of the records are with in .030 A/FIA A/SA B/FIA C/SA and C/FIA E/FIA The only one that is faster is Private Ryan the old school cars are faster in C and E. So really are they better?

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Hey Let me help you all out! Go to the classified section and buy my car! I will show you all the tricks that all of us FI guys have like the control, alt, F7 tune up. It helped Mark Maul with the US Nationals in 06! Jim Waldo has switched and never looked back!

Re: hey len !!!!
 

That only because they are all 1.35 + under... With the .2 off the index it'll be interesting to see how fast they (and the Ford 428s for that matter) can really go.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Why don't you bring up the Cam Specs??? That 390 int 401 lift cam in that 396 I'm sure is at a disatvantage. The intake on the 396 is also suspect, compared to an intake that just has to worry about charging Air into a MPI lower intake. Maybe not all FI cars have an avantage, but many of them have.Just look at the SS qualifying for that Atco Points race.

Todd Hoven
1035 Stk

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Todd - FI is not legal in Pro Stock. Comparing comp engines and the engineering intake tracts they can construct to a stock eliminator engine limited to cylinder head technology that is 30 years old is ludicrous. 600 cfm throttle body is dry air, equivalent to 880 cfm carburetor for ability to pass enough air to mix with the fuel that can be programmed for volume and duration in accordance with valve action and forced into the cylinder at 40+ psi. No comparison. Not to mention that the LS1 heads flow better than the 396-325 heads and the intake tract is shorter.

Not even apples and oranges; more like rocks and monkeys.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

oh yay...

i get to run a 350 cid caddy which weighs 500lbs less and has a 3 speed tranny and a 500cfm throttle body...

seems overmatched against my 283, 4470lbs, 2speed trans and 435 cfm 4gc

oh what a great enhancement...

captain jack

dear bob, please post your race schedule so i can hide out :)

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Len , Thank you for your reply. I would like to suggest this: The only way this is going to work is to count all rounds of class eliminations, and do it about four times a year.
Can you tell us what the new AHFS trigger will be? Giving us .05 to play with and making it 1 second under would be a step in the right direction.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Len ,Thanks for yor reply i must say i don,t agree with all of what you said, or nhra,s view on throwing us all back together, i guess time will tell !!!!! I still remember distictly what those new camaros and firbird,s tailight look like from years past .... thank,s dennis j/sa

Re: hey len !!!!
 

If I counted correctly, at the memphis race,,,counting Fi with carb cars,,,AND if they hadnt changed classes,,,there was going to be 39 cars from A/SA to E/SA,,,,,,,,who ever is favor of heads up runs are going to get what they wanted....thats 39 out of 78

Re: hey len !!!!
 

I sure most of you know, but this needs to be said. How much volume of the intake charges is taken up by fuel? If you eliminate it, and inject it with a nozzle later on in the intake port what flow do you gain? Substantial.

Most older engines start splitting out the fuel creating wet flow combustion conditions that the significantly reduce combustion efficiency. Fuel injection can avoid many of these issues by injecting the fuel just after these high speed turns. The density of the fuel being much higher than air causes the fuel to separate causing wet flow. This happens severely on the short turns avoided in many cases by the fuel injector placement.

On top of that, NHRA still hasnt realized that the older engines are rated dyno HP and the newer engines are essentially rear wheel. It is also proof that AHFS is severely limited. If you have a very fast car with an advantage, by design the AHFS keeps that engine perpetually on the top. If it has a severe advantage it takes years just to bring in check, sometimes never.

We have one engine in Super Stock that was completely bogus and has received 43HP since the inception of the AHFS, and it still dominates SS today. Another engine had 7 National Records and got 6HP off in 2002, then 18HP back on since, and is the second dominant engine in SS. If AHFS was working how could this happen? These engines are going still 1.3 under with no doubt tons of sandbagging.

Yes, AHFS is better than doing nothing, but once a combo is bogus due to after market parts, original ratings, or a clerical mistake, it is on top forever by its design metrics. If NHRA is going to put the FI cars in with the older cars, they need to revisit the merits of the AHFS as I can 100% guarantee it wont fix it. You can put ear rings on a pig, but it is still a pig.

Lynn

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Do people REALLY want the AHFS to work? I am sure most VOICE that opinion but if you have a fast car, you chose by skill and using the understanding of the technology and the NHRA loose factoring you probably have some reasons to be selfish.
The only way it will work is to use as many runs as possible at as many locations as possible. Heads up class runs are the best but we know that can be played with too. If a record PAID or winning class PAID or qualifying high PAID people would be more apt to get factored quicker.
If crossing the scales overweight by over (some wt 100 or 200 lb) were a factoring offense that would help too.
The problems stem from TOO many Motors, legal for S or SS. This is a continual source of research for the sharp book racers. More solid pre race factoring would help but if there is a pressure to upgrade the years of cars racing then the loose factoring is just the ticket. example FI cars growth as result of weak factor to get them built and replace vintage iron......