I need to apologize!!
 

I thought I knew the 2023 AHFS rules that are in effect for 2023 Stock, Super Stock season. I thought that any fast runs could be,,FIXED,,through the season by runs .650 to .850 under. I was TOTALLY wrong and at the Divisional at No Problem Dragway in February in the final for G/SA class I went
1.127 under for the win.
In the new AHFS rule #7 states,, if the engine combination reviewed is deemed to be over the .850 max,,then the fasted run under through out the year will be used to calculate how much horsepower increase will be made,,even though we had minimal 0-20 oil,iced intake and chilled the engine.
There is NO correcting our fasted run.
I apologize for not reading the rules correctly,but now after the damage has been done,,there's no correcting.
Our combination is the 69 Camaro 350 255 280hp. We've had our butts kicked so many times over the past many years and now we finally worked on our combo,spent lots of money only to maybe screw up our combination. This used to be fun.
I can except any comments.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

You have time to lower the average.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

It’s now a math problem. How many runs at .650 to .680 under will it take to lower the engine average less than .850 under? The only place safe will be the All Star race and the Sports Nationals. You may bring your average down in your class, but if someone with the same combo in a different class averages .850 everyone will get hit. The best hope is if the trigger has only been pulled once!
Good luck in walking the tightrope.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

On a bye run, if you only make a cruise run (20 second pass), does it get averaged in?

What if you only break the beam & back out?

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Tim, you are fine. It’s still early in the season. In the Sorensen Brothers we Trust. They will get it all ironed out , they always do…..

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

It doesn't count. The rule was changed so that you have to go .65 under for the run to count towards the average. It seems that I am part of the small minority that actually thinks the new AHFS rules will sort out some combos in a hurry. That being said, I might have a different opinion if I had just spend $20k+ on a new engine, just to have to add weight by next year. What I would like to see, but will most likely never happen, is if someone goes wickedly fast, for NHRA to make an effort to make sure their stuff is legal before the entire combo suffers.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

MJ I don’t think the 350 Chevy holds that much water.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

No, runs under .65 won't count.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

I know that this will not sit well with a lot of you. I rarely post but I feel that I need to a least vent on this.
All the money that we spend to make our cars faster and more competitive only to be hand tied to go too fast and hurt our or our combo. To some it's all about the win to some it's all about how the car performs. In the end the blend of both is desirable. The current policy in place to me is confusing at best. and now we have good people with fast cars making decision based on index rather than making the car fast and consistent. Not sure this right and in the good spirt of class racing good for the sport. I know that there will be poo poo,rs so I guess let the dart throwers have at it.

Dirk Olson
A/S 5036

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Tim, Not sure what you're apologizing for .
For winning class?
For hitting the trigger twice?
For taking too much win light in the class final and putting your combo in the second tier for HP?

Be that as it may, the year end average for your combo has to be under -.85 .
If it's above that, what ET was used in the past to determine the HP hit? What's new then?
You can still lower the average by running.65 to .849 under as has been done every other year with this popular combo.
Am I missing something else new that pertains to Tim?
Anybody?

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Thursday Test and tuning for .65 under runs? Not .649. Easier said than done.

Paul

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Paulie, Yeah, but if you look at recent Q sheets, about 30-40 % are right there anyway.

What I don't understand is guys with popular combos running 95 under regularly.. Most likely won't even get a bye run out of it...It can only come back to bite them.
Sure it ain't fun to slow yourself down but that's the hand we're dealt.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Brings a whole new meaning to index racing.

Bent

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Got your Paulie! Look me up!

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

So Tim are you saying that no matter what happens from here forward, we get HP?

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Tim you you worked hard and spent $ enjoy what you haveThis isnt about you its about NHRA and their foolish rules
What we do is about performance not about slowing down
We spend 20K to 30k for a motor to slow it down
Until the racer has NHRA respect we will deal with this until stock is done or might as well be done
I love NHRA racing but hate where were headed.....

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

All runs for that engine combo regardless of class/combo that are faster than .649 will be averaged together and if faster than .850 the motor gets a hit using the fastest run recorded. So you need for that engine combo to have as many runs between .850 and .650 to get the average lowered. Been there done that and its difficult to race that way

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Tim I'm shocked we didn't get hit this past winter. When I watched some cars with our combo qualify and race set up plus 1 second under IN BRACKET MODE last year I was literally shaking my head!!

I didn't freshen my stuff over the winter specifically because of the new rules. I'm doing my best to keep our average down! LOL!!

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

I believe you just admitted that the 350/255 needs horsepower and I have happened to agree with that for quite a while, check my record.
The 396/375 is next.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

The Sorensen Bros. can make a 307 fast. Have they not done that yet?

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

That Camaro is the fastest Gen 1 Camaro on the freak'n planet.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

OMG !! This is the most ridiculous post of the decade !! Sooo!! Bubski's thinking !! Now you've gone beyond the valve job rule that doesn't exist anymore !! ?? Bubski is for sure that no matter what you do with the valve job will not replace the BURR grinder !! Remember no grinding ?? Probably also got the "stocker pistons" with the altered ring lands for the $$$$$$ you spent and the 6# lighter cast iron intake !! Just to name a few !! All these years of racing a limited platform and now this quantum leap in performance ?? Just ask yourself if what you did was legal !! And accept the consequences either way !! Im sure a big capital investment of circumventing the rules is justification enough for doing whatever you want !! CHEERS !!

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

bubski thanks for the compliments!! Know take a deep breath and loosen your undies. It will get better for you,,I even think there's meds for you and another New Yorker. I see you are highly educated and I'm no match for a intelligent person like you and another New Yorker. Lol,,,CHEERS!!!

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Whats done is done. Not throwing rocks, we just need to be smart when possible given the cards we're dealt. Its really pretty simple, run fast when its dictated, but run 70 to 80 under when circumstances allow. I'll help with extrapolating your runs if you want, and I'm not not being a wise *** when I say that.

If one gets a first round single, put a 75 under run in the data base not a non-counting 58.

If one red lights second round don't hold it wide open and go 90 under.

With that said, its a free country and its your car.

You set it up and drove and the car did what you asked.
 

Rather than cloak, please explain why accurately factoring a vehicle based on true performance capability isn't appropriate and not the best course of action?

The sanctioning body doesn't give a rodentias patoot with regard to who sets the standard for performance in any given class or what that standard may be. Fellow competitors face the impact of this masking and ultimate inaccuracy.

Sounds as though the prudent endeavor is to eliminate the attempt at correction and the system designed and implemented to do so.

The sanctioning body will have no qualm or trepidation if the competitors choose in this manner.

Accuracy and accountability are demanded with regard to inspection but disregarded as it relates to actual performance.


From this point, let them fly.





Bubski may be the salient one in these discussions.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

It seems like a lot of the problems we've seen in stock as far as rule bending really became amplified when the majority of racers decided to just go out and "buy horsepower" from select engine builder. Most not even batting an eye on how that extra horsepower was made. Unfortunately, it has evolved into a game of who can hide their "enhancements" the best. What seems to be true for most combos, is that if you build an engine exactly as the rulebook states, you aren't going to be anywhere close to those that spent the money to have a really fast bullet built. While it's easy to blame the NHRA for everything, I can't help but think us racers share a deal of fault for allowing stock to get to this point. It seems like NHRA has made up their mind as far as policing these enhancements, so as far as I'm concerned, building an engine to uphold the "integrity" of stock eliminator, is sort of a waste of time if you really want to have a chance in a heads up situation. I've yet to see a trophy for "most stock" car. Personally, I like to stick with the "built, not bought" program, but if I wasn't a broke college student, maybe that'd be different.

"Rule bending" is a euphemism.

"Hide their enhancements"... from whom?

The sanctioning body hasn't made up its mind on anything. The act or react to what is requested of them.

At the administrative level, there is no concern whether vehicles in a specific class perform at the 9.50 or 11.50 level provided the mandated safety equipment is in place.

These individual performance standards are exclusively germinated at the competitor level.

The sanctioning body shoulders no blame. The racers are solely responsible for the subterfuge that corrupts this category.

The lack of rectitude has no impact on the group sanctioning the events.

The people directly affected by shunned veracity are those that help you push when you need it or pitch in when you require assistance or back out of the beam to wait while you deal with issues.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

As Dan says whats done is done. We all make mistakes. I have run this combo since the '90's when almost everyone was faster in a heads up run.It was fun while it lasted so if we return to those times, we will survive and play the ladder game again. No changes here. It's still fun to race.I still like racing a '69 and I like the way it looks.

Suggestions that illustrate the core issue
 

A more clear example of what beleaguers this category and the competitors associated with it is not likely found.

The suggestions posited are at the core of the self-inflicted trauma that permeates this category.

Whether attributed to content or approbation, observe how many are in agreement and the reality of creating and implementing an effective system is insuperably difficult, if not out of reach.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

This absolutely nothing new. This has been going on since the beginning. The cost of admission may have gone up 10-20k on enhancing but people have pushed the rules since the start of all this. There have always been a large portion pushing it hard. I even sold a car 20 years ago because the engines were going north of 20K. Little did I know that was going to be industry standard for good parts......not just enhanced parts, good parts.

There was never a system in place until the AHFS. Like it or not, it took the arbitrary "you went fast the last two races and your combo is in National Dragster getting 5 - 15 hp in the next issue. What we are really missing is people looking at cars. I may be one to ask for it but when i can practically order lunch for who is tearing down next to me in the barn at Indy, we are not checking randomly.

It was clear to me from the get go that .70 under runs are gold and you need as many of them under your belt as you can get.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

That's an interesting suggestion. What was the reasoning behind it?

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

For someone with so much to say, you sure are out of touch...

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

You may be correct.

It's the lack of due diligence that is at the foundation of my character flaws.

At the risk of incensing some, I'll ask again.


That's an interesting suggestion. What was the reasoning behind it?

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

The way I read the review process is if there are 2 runs more than 1 second under the index for a particular combo and platform then an automatic review will happen. If the class average is more than .85 under at the time of the review the combo will receive a HP increase based on the fastest run by that combination. If the class average is less than .85 under then index no HP increase happens. So if you made 2 runs faster than one second under this year you will automatically get a review to check the class average.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Couple of questions, is Indy going to keep AHFS in this year? If so it would almost certainly get a trigger there at some point. There is plenty of season left though so it's way early to predict who or how many will get a HP increase.
Is the 1969 350/300HP combo that much worse and what parts are different than the 255 version? Point being if it's an intake manifold change and that is not as favorable maybe you can run that combo at the faster races typically,
I don't have a horse in that race anyway

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

The 350/300hp uses a different cylinder head. It uses the earlier style head (462, 186, 041 etc.). I'll have a better understanding of 255 vs 300hp after I get my 70 300hp motor together and in the car, hopefully within the upcoming months. One thing I can't seem to understand, as a 69, you can run the 255hp, 300hp, or 70 300hp intake on the car, but as a 70, you're only allowed the 70 intake. There's still a decent number of racers running the 67-68 295hp combo, which is the same as a 300hp except for the intake, but no one seems to be going as fast as the 255hp cars.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

If you have five .700 runs and you make a 1.20 run you will not get HP. The more .700 runs you bank, the more times you can let it hang out. Obviously, that only applies if everyone running your combination follows the same plan....

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Daren laid out the answer spot on. If you bank your average at .70 under, when you go 1.15 it won’t bite you. If you plan on class racing or winning a heads up in the eliminator and don’t want to move classes next year, then they have laid out how to play the game with their bat, ball, glove and field.

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Just keep in mind that you need enough .700 runs to cover each fast run that you make...

Re: I need to apologize!!
 

Good post Daren -- This is the problem with this whole program . Someone has 1or 2 triggers in March already , and they will have to throttle-stop their car the rest of the year, and hope everybody does the same. Doesn't look like a good way to race to me !!! I have no interest to run my car that way.