Qualifying with no AHFS

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by Darrel Goheen

I'll try to ask a few random drivers in stock or super stock if they are looking for a heads up race or trying to prevent one.

The question is flawed. I'm usually the slow guy. Of course I try to prevent a heads-up run. That doesn't mean I want to change the rules and gut the core of what class racing is. Principles matter over personal agendas.

Originally Posted by Casey Miles

Let me ask, how many members were really asked or even got a message about this subject before the decision came from NHRA?

I had an NHRA official completely IGNORE a direct rules question multiple times (after I'd already been passed around by two other officials). He started talking about irrelevant things and literally would not even acknowledge that I had asked the question. Rude, incompetent, condescending, and disingenuous. I would have FIRED that man on the spot. NHRA has given me no reason to think that my questions or opinions matter in the first place. I am spending my money elsewhere this year.

[fredjohnston]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

The question is flawed. I'm usually the slow guy. Of course I try to prevent a heads-up run. That doesn't mean I want to change the rules and gut the core of what class racing is. Principles matter over personal agendas.




I had an NHRA official completely IGNORE a direct rules question multiple times (after I'd already been passed around by two other officials). He started talking about irrelevant things and literally would not even acknowledge that I had asked the question. Rude, incompetent, condescending, and disingenuous. I would have FIRED that man on the spot. NHRA has given me no reason to think that my questions or opinions matter in the first place. I am spending my money elsewhere this year.

We miss you.

[Jeff Teuton]

This has been floating for years. It has been brought up at SRAC, it has been proposed for Indy as a stand alone, it has been brought up as a Sportsnational only item, and it goes along with changes suggested or proposed for AHFS which has run it course IMHO. The NO AHFS at National Opens is a result of people asking it to go away so Somewhere you can run wide open. The AHFS was a result of a previous factoring system that was exposed to politics, but now it has been adjusted, interpreted, to where lots of if not most doubt its' effect. It's kind of like a Swimming Pool Tech told me about salt water pools; it takes about ten years for the flaws to appear from what was ideal on paper. No use in going into the flaws here, my fingers would wear out. I think NHRA might just want to see how fast some of these cars can run; old and new and in between. New being 2008 and newer, Old being carb(s) only, and In Between EFI. Maybe a new factoring system study?

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by Jeff Teuton

This has been floating for years. It has been brought up at SRAC, it has been proposed for Indy as a stand alone, it has been brought up as a Sportsnational only item, and it goes along with changes suggested or proposed for AHFS which has run it course IMHO. The NO AHFS at National Opens is a result of people asking it to go away so Somewhere you can run wide open. The AHFS was a result of a previous factoring system that was exposed to politics, but now it has been adjusted, interpreted, to where lots of if not most doubt its' effect. It's kind of like a Swimming Pool Tech told me about salt water pools; it takes about ten years for the flaws to appear from what was ideal on paper. No use in going into the flaws here, my fingers would wear out. I think NHRA might just want to see how fast some of these cars can run; old and new and in between. New being 2008 and newer, Old being carb(s) only, and In Between EFI. Maybe a new factoring system study?

^^ Good point.

Since I am a Ford guy, I did some studying of the classification guide for the OBD II Fords model years dating back to 1996. (FS cars do not count)

I find it interesting that in the last 10 years not one single 96 and newer eligible Ford has neither had a horsepower increase due to going too quick, nor has there been a h.p. decrease due to someone barely running the index and requesting a decrease in h.p.

That right there is telling to me...it means the combos are over factored and no one wants to build them.

If they did build them, they need to be at least 7-8 tenths under to be somewhat competitive .... (competitive meaning standing a decent chance in a same class match up ) Hasn't happened in 20 years because none of the production line OBD II Ford models are factored correctly.

IMO, NHRA needs to factor the production line models at 80% of their advertised SAE h.p. and let the racers build the combos.
Then let the AHFS take care of the quick combos.

Until then, I suppose we are back to 25-50 year old cars for the most part as our only choice.

[rowdyboys31]

Alan, looks like NHRA is already doing that with factory HP on a few newer street cars. Here's a few I found 2009 mustang GT 4.6 factory 300hp/NHRA Guide 270hp, 2010 mustang GT 4.6 factory 315hp/ NHRA Guide270hp, 2013 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 Hemi factory 470hp/NHRA Guide 380hp/New389hp.JK

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by rowdyboys31

Alan, looks like NHRA is already doing that with factory HP on a few newer street cars. Here's a few I found 2009 mustang GT 4.6 factory 300hp/NHRA Guide 270hp, 2010 mustang GT 4.6 factory 315hp/ NHRA Guide270hp, 2013 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 Hemi factory 470hp/NHRA Guide 380hp/New389hp.JK

Of the ones you listed, it appears that Jeff Teuton with the 2013 Challenger @ 380 hp is the only competitive car out there.
Last year his Challenger was over 1.1 sec. under in B/SA and C/SA.
I haven't seen this years stats yet.

The 2010 Camaro is the only production year Camaro listed since 2002 and even it seems rated too high @ 400 hp. Not sure if anyone has tried that combo yet.

The '05-'14 Mustang combos are not competitive, IMO.
The '11-'14 Coyote Mustangs are rated more than a CJ....with pretty much the same engine.

I still think NHRA should rate the newer cars @ 80% of the dealer brochure advertised hp...then let the AHFS system take care of the fast cars.

[Mike Pearson]

Originally Posted by ALMACK

Of the ones you listed, it appears that Jeff Teuton with the 2013 Challenger @ 380 hp is the only competitive car out there.
Last year his Challenger was over 1.1 sec. under in B/SA and C/SA.
I haven't seen this years stats yet.

The 2010 Camaro is the only production year Camaro listed since 2002 and even it seems rated too high @ 400 hp. Not sure if anyone has tried that combo yet.

The '05-'14 Mustang combos are not competitive, IMO.
The '11-'14 Coyote Mustangs are rated more than a CJ....with pretty much the same engine.

I still think NHRA should rate the newer cars @ 80% of the dealer brochure advertised hp...then let the AHFS system take care of the fast cars.

If they put the newer street cars in the guide it should start at the advertised factoryHP then go up or down as needed per the AHFS. This has been the way it has been done since the start.