Stock Suggestion # 1

[Qwikpony]

Or, leave your cars where they are at and ressurrect the "FI" classes(with an index adjustment). NHRA would only need a few and if the manufacturers are building these to compete with each other then no one should mind a 360 DP,a 352CJ and a 350 COPO all running in the same class. This is essentially an IHRA "crate engine" class and is very similar to the GT classes in SS. What about those that could not find 200 lbs. to take out that comes with the 10% reduction ? Let's not complicate it too much. The right answer is a separate class within Stock for the DPs, CJs and COPOs.

[442OLDS]

Originally Posted by Qwikpony

Let's not complicate it too much. The right answer is a separate class within Stock for the DPs, CJs and COPOs.

This thread sure got off base.I don't even know what it is about any more.

I thought the discussion was about Indy.At Indy,there was a separate class for the majority of these cars called Factory Stock.If not Factory Stock,they created all kinds of new classes with so many A's and B's that I don't think any old cars even run in those classes anyways.

Some were upset that they were not eligible for AHFS.However IF they were,they simply would have slowed them down.They still would have qualified.

Maybe Comp isn't such a bad idea.I ran a Copo at Earlville in Round one that ran 8.79.

Comp only had about 17 cars in Earlville,so they could certainly use more cars in that class.

What is the main issue that this thread is attempting to fix again?

[Qwikpony]

The fact that so many of the newer cars did qualify ( 1.2+ under) and bumped out some older cars is part of what this thread is trying to fix ( I think). The other part is the "older" BB and CC cars that have to run the "newer" EFI cars "heads up".

[442OLDS]

Originally Posted by Qwikpony

The fact that so many of the newer cars did qualify ( 1.2+ under) and bumped out some older cars is part of what this thread is trying to fix ( I think). The other part is the "older" BB and CC cars that have to run the "newer" EFI cars "heads up".

The first part is easily fixed with an ALL RUN field........Done.

The second part is the luck of the draw.

I race a 1970 Olds that is rated 10 horsepower less than the factory rated it.

I could have to race a 1970 Chevy LT1 that is rated 35 horsepower less than the factory rated it.

Is this fair? I really don't think so,but if it happens,you take your lumps and go to the next race.Stock will never be "fair"

[Greg Hill]

Originally Posted by 442OLDS

The first part is easily fixed with an ALL RUN field........Done.

The second part is the luck of the draw.

I race a 1970 Olds that is rated 10 horsepower less than the factory rated it.

I could have to race a 1970 Chevy LT1 that is rated 35 horsepower less than the factory rated it.

Is this fair? I really don't think so,but if it happens,you take your lumps and go to the next race.Stock will never be "fair"

You could also have to race another 70 Olds, or a 400 Pontiac, or a 340 Chrysler, or a 390 Ford, or a 396 Chevy and you would lose to them also. If you choose not to do the work or spend the money to make your car fast that is your choice. What upsets some of us is that if you have a fast old car that you have worked on and have spent the money on you can still be 4 or 5 tenths or more behind a new car in your same class because they may be 100 hp soft.

[442OLDS]

Originally Posted by Greg Hill

You could also have to race another 70 Olds, or a 400 Pontiac, or a 340 Chrysler, or a 390 Ford, or a 396 Chevy and you would lose to them also. If you choose not to do the work or spend the money to make your car fast that is your choice. What upsets some of us is that if you have a fast old car that you have worked on and have spent the money on you can still be 4 or 5 tenths or more behind a new car in your same class because they may be 100 hp soft.

I see your point,but my point is that IF I chose to spend the money to make my car as fast as possible,I would STILL not run as fast as another 1970 car that is rated 35 horsepower less than the factory rated it.No way,No how!

If you are 2,3,or 5 tenths or even a second behind in a heads up race does it really matter?

[Qwikpony]

You will never know unless you try. However, it sounds like your Olds is not in a class that is flooded with the newer cars. The ultimate goal is to have a fair and equitable eliminator for every car in every class where everybody has a fair chance to win. Maybe you should petiton NHRA to take a few ponies off your combination. Then, you could run faster and not spend more than the cost of an envelope and a stamp.That is like finding free horsepower and your car could be lighter (easier on parts) which is a win for you in more ways than one.

[Andrew Hill]

Originally Posted by 442OLDS

I see your point,but my point is that IF I chose to spend the money to make my car as fast as possible,I would STILL not run as fast as another 1970 car that is rated 35 horsepower less than the factory rated it.No way,No how!

Would it make you happier if I ran the 1972 combo that is rated 60 hp more than it was from the factory? I promise it would be just as fast.

[Paul Precht]

Originally Posted by 442OLDS

The first part is easily fixed with an ALL RUN field........Done.

The second part is the luck of the draw.

I race a 1970 Olds that is rated 10 horsepower less than the factory rated it.

I could have to race a 1970 Chevy LT1 that is rated 35 horsepower less than the factory rated it.

Is this fair? I really don't think so,but if it happens,you take your lumps and go to the next race.Stock will never be "fair"

Stock will never be fair because of the politics, any 10 year old kid can do the math but NHRA seems to struggle with the simplest of problems, it's pretty sad but it's their playground, if we don't like it we can stay home.