View Single Post
Old 09-23-2009, 09:53 AM   #48
Michael Beard
VIP Member
 
Michael Beard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 4,060
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times in 9 Posts
Default Re: New rules for 2010?

Quote:
It looked like there were going to be more G and H cars, so I can F. I'm so far down the latter it's not like it makes a difference whether I run .1 under or .30 under. So mathematical odds of getting a heads up would be less.
Which reminds me of another suggestion I've made before: Each class should have a minimum AND maximum weight. If you're running heavy enough to run the next class, then you should be required to run that class. This is actually born out by the rulebook labeling classes as 10.00 - 10.49, 10.50 - 10.99, etc... NOT 10.00 and up, 10.50 and up, etc.

Consider:
- Min & Max weights
- combined classes (1.0 weight breaks, sticks & autos, or both)
Results in:
- cars no longer running 200lbs heavy
- more heads-up runs
- cars will quickly factor themselves to realistic numbers
- guys can still get started in Stock relatively easily with the "soft" indexes, but are incentivized to make their cars faster.


In all fairness, again, I'm not campaigning for these things... just academic discussion. Doesn't bother me either way if they adopt these things or not. It *would* bother me if they dropped all the indexes .50, as it effectively legislates cars out that are not hurting anything (In fact, quite the opposite... easy pickin's, right?)
__________________
Michael Beard - NHRA/IHRA 3216 S/SS
Michael Beard is offline   Reply With Quote