Is there a supreme tech god for Stock and Super/Stock

[Alan Roehrich]

All the B.S. about the aluminum 9" center section is just more silliness. It's a few pounds of unsprung weight, that allows for that weight to be moved.

It's like aluminum radiators. The weight advantage itself is negligible, at best, and anyone wanting that weight advantage can find it elsewhere.

Anyone notice Pond slowing down when they made him take his out? I'm betting Ken won't slow down, either.

I suppose a racer were to have an aftermarket 9" housing that had 12 bolt Chevy parts in it, THAT would be a valid issue for tech.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

All the B.S. about the aluminum 9" center section is just more silliness.

Alan, you probably feel the same way about the negligible affect of aftermarket seats in Stock too.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Alan, you probably feel the same way about the negligible affect of aftermarket seats in Stock too.

Billy, with the advent of 135 MPH cars in Stock Eliminator, I think the safety aspects outweigh the other factors. It's called a "necessary evil". The fast cars in Stock now have to have all of the safety equipment that a fairly fast Super Stock car has. It's not a matter of what you or I want, or what you or I like, it's a matter of safety.

It's a plain simple fact that you can make a Stock Eliminator car as close to perfect on weight distribution as it can legally be without any of those things.

People howl over things that don't matter, while they look over things that do matter. A case of the elephant in the living room.

[Billy Nees]

[QUOTE=Alan Roehrich;244948

People howl over things that don't matter, while they look over things that do matter. A case of the elephant in the living room.[/QUOTE]

And on that, I will have to agree with you!
Now, let's start a "meaningful dialog" on the pathetic purses!

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

And on that, I will have to agree with you!
Now, let's start a "meaningful dialog" on the pathetic purses!

Billy, the problem is that it will not be meaningful to NHRA, the people who set the purse and the fees.

But as an example, for a 64 car field in Stock Eliminator, the payout should be $2500 to win. And the entry fee really ought to be $250 for car, driver, and one crew. That would be a payout of ten times the entry fee. For an 100 car field, it ought to be $3000, that would be twelve times the entry fee. At 128 cars, it should pay at least $3750. As the field gets bigger, so should the purse. That's a start, and not at all unreasonable.

[art leong]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

All the B.S. about the aluminum 9" center section is just more silliness. It's a few pounds of unsprung weight, that allows for that weight to be moved.

It's like aluminum radiators. The weight advantage itself is negligible, at best, and anyone wanting that weight advantage can find it elsewhere.

Anyone notice Pond slowing down when they made him take his out? I'm betting Ken won't slow down, either.

I suppose a racer were to have an aftermarket 9" housing that had 12 bolt Chevy parts in it, THAT would be a valid issue for tech.

There are a couple of ways to look at what they nhra tech did to Ken.
One was they could have told him to change it when he got home. I believe this would have been the right thing to do.
But they could have let him go through tech, then after qualifying. Tossed him. I've had that done to me. At least Ken had a chance to fix it before the race.
The only thing nhra tech has been successful with is nitpicking. I went through it last year with my front fenders.
What happened to all the hooplah about the runner cc's?

[danny waters sr]

Another question, If NHRA would have told him to change it by the next race ,would Ken have told everybody that , or would it not be mentioned till it was set as an example ? If Ken would not have said anything now ,this would still be a little secret. I respect Ken for telling it so it would not happen to others......I also think Ken would have told it if he was given til the next race. You have my respect Ken...This is two ways of looking at it from both sides. Shady rule as you say anyway....

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by danny waters sr

Another question, If NHRA would have told him to change it by the next race ,would Ken have told everybody that , or would it not be mentioned till it was set as an example ? If Ken would not have said anything now ,this would still be a little secret. I respect Ken for telling it so it would not happen to others......I also think Ken would have told it if he was given til the next race. You have my respect Ken...This is two ways of looking at it from both sides. Shady rule as you say anyway....

If it did indeed happen the other week with another car, why didn't they just issue a bulletin, a rule clarification? If one guy does it, there are probably more out there either effected, or people considering the upgrade to their car. They should just let everyone know where they stand on the issue and be done with it. It shouldn't have taken Kenny to bring this to light.

As for the rule itself, NHRA says "same manufacturer" and then backtracks when THEY allow the manufacturer to run things in Stock that shouldn't be there in the first place.

$.02,

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

If it did indeed happen the other week with another car, why didn't they just issue a bulletin, a rule clarification? If one guy does it, there are probably more out there either effected, or people considering the upgrade to their car. They should just let everyone know where they stand on the issue and be done with it. It shouldn't have taken Kenny to bring this to light.

As for the rule itself, NHRA says "same manufacturer" and then backtracks when THEY allow the manufacturer to run things in Stock that shouldn't be there in the first place.

$.02,

EXACTLY! NHRA should have issued a tech bulletin, published online and in the Dragster, clarifying the rule. And if they don't do it next week, you can be sure they're holding off so that they don't have to apply it in a case where they don't want to. THAT is a problem I have with all of this.

[art leong]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

EXACTLY! NHRA should have issued a tech bulletin, published online and in the Dragster, clarifying the rule. And if they don't do it next week, you can be sure they're holding off so that they don't have to apply it in a case where they don't want to. THAT is a problem I have with all of this.

When they told me at E'town last year not to come back with my fenders. They sent a formal letter to me and CC it to all division directors. It was quite an embarassment to me. All over a couple of holes in fenders that had inner fenderwells and was absolutly no aerodynamic or performance advantage.