New rules for 2010?

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by Sean Cour

GTX JOHN-

Stock eliminator wasn't supposed to be easy. You have to work on your combo. Being smart is as much of a reason for being fast as having a lot of money. Most, usually don't give credit for a racer working smart, it's always how much money they spent. You answered one of my questions I was eluding too. Why should a Stocker be able to qualify for Superstock?

Maybe, just reduce the Superstock indexes .50?

I've been saying that for a long time. If a stocker can run that far under the SS index, the SS index is way too soft. I have caught a lot of flack for it, but I never said lower the stock indexes. I don't have a Stocker, don't have a dog in that fight, so don't care what they do "over there". I also don't spend a lot of money on mine, I just work on it.

[Sean Cour]

Originally Posted by Mark Faul

Sean, I think you mean if you were a dumba$$ like me! With no regards to the value of a dollar! LOL

Mark-

You have done almost everything, within your means. You're just a junky. Just when you think you're going to go back home, you win one, then two.

I, for one, am envious. You do an outstanding job for doing it on your own.

Sean

[Sean Kennedy]

Originally Posted by sean cour

mark-

you have done almost everything, within your means. You're just a junky. Just when you think you're going to go back home, you win one, then two.

I, for one, am envious. You do an outstanding job for doing it on your own.

Sean

+1

[Sean Kennedy]

Originally Posted by Sean Cour

Sean-

When I started racing 15 yrs.ago, (I know, I sound like a parent) but, I owned Gary Waldo's Nova. Damn good car, still is obviously. My family and I beat on that thing, and we could run .87 under. With all of the "performance enhancements" that have been dealt out, or allowed, don't you think that a index adjustment is warranted? Oh, and that .87 under would get you a top 5 qualifying spot.

A top 5 spot now is at least 1.20-1.35 under. Given where, and when. I just have a view that seems to be fading a little bit. Performance still means something in stock and superstock. You have to learn how to find it, then spend wisely on how to maintain and improve it.


Sean

Sean,

No, you don't sound like a parent. LOL. I enjoy your insight into the class.

I actually completely agree with you. I love bracket racing. I also love technical innovation and ingenuity. So naturally, I love stock and super stock. I really love comp but I'm pretty sure it will forever be out of my budget.

Personally though, I would rather see the current rules at hand enforced rather than changing the indexes. If people were more likely to get bounced for dirty heads I don't think you would see people going quite as fast. But I am guessing that has been a problem since before you even started class racing 15 years ago.

Super Stock has been given some "performance enhancements" over the last 10 years too, though not as much as stock. Would it not be reasonable to say that the super stock indexes are the ones that should be lowered? Or maybe both?

[Doug Blackley]

Instead of messing with the indexes, just raise the triggers. This will accomplish the same thing as lowering but not effect those who aren't as fast.

[Sean Cour]

Originally Posted by Doug Blackley

Instead of messing with the indexes, just raise the triggers. This will accomplish the same thing as lowering but not effect those who aren't as fast.

The reason (at least, my opinion) is to level out some of the ridiculousness. Don't you think the indexes are weak when a LT-1 stocker can run .80 under the superstock indexes? (just an example)

A stocker, if purpose built for stock, should struggle to run the superstock index in mediocre air. Obviously, there will be some combos that will perform better, and some worse. But it's a start.

With all of the "enhancements" over the last twenty years, most stockers should be able to run .75 under the current index system. Where in the rule book does it state, " I class race, it is my right, that I should be under the index?

[Doug Blackley]

Sean, I was intending that by only raising the trigger will not effect anyone on the lower end but still give the fast guys a chance to show their work off. My thought is to have to least adverse effect and just adjusting the trigger will do that.

[Sean Cour]

Twice, out of twelve teardowns. I understand what you're saying Ed, but if NHRA isn't going to enforce the rules that are written, and/or hand out performance gains. Then the indexes need to be adjusted.

Pretty simple to understand.

[Sean Kennedy]

Originally Posted by Sean Cour

Then the indexes need to be adjusted.

Why not adjust super stock indexes? Or BOTH classes? If it's good for the goose....

[Sean Cour]

Ed-

Well, I'm not saying that they will do it. But for Superstock, it's ridiculous when a "stocker" can run .80 under. That's what I'm trying to say.

Sean