to all 85-92 efi racers

[House of Darts]

I'm looking to purchase a turbo as a stocker. Yes it can probably qualify #1 during the summer weather, but my main reservation in purchasing one is the lack of consistancy. LOOK FOR #1 OR RUNNER UPS W/ A TURBO? I HAVE NOT FOUND ONE. And if there is one well, everyone needs to race one and get ready to collect their Wally.

[Jim Wahl]

Mr.Darts,
You are correct about consistency, it is a problem with turbo cars, sticks or autos. Intercooled turbos run better in the summer that non intercooled. They all run better in the cool weather just like non turbo cars. jim

[bill dedman]

Jim Wahl said, "Your data MUST include all races not just National events"

Not if my contention is that an inordinate amount of turbo cars qualify #1 at national events. That statement stands on its own and doesn't include points races, BECAUSE the problem doesn't exist at points races.

Why include a set of statistics from races that have no bearing on the subject? I am only concerned with the performance of these cars at NATIONAL EVENTS. Is that so hard to understand?

You accuse me of skewing the statistics, but once again, let me say that, the foir years I posted the qualifiers for, included every national event (plus Sportsnational) and nothing else. I identified each race where the qualifying was listed. I don't know what more I could have done. I used ALL the data for those races.

I am sure that NHRA will turn their customary blind eye to this problem, since fixing it wouldn't make them another red cent. You can relax; nobody's going to take your "above factory spec" boost away from you.

As far as my car goes, I wanted to retain my power steering, power brakes and air conditioning, because it's just a street car that sees action in Brackets from time-to-time. Your friend's big block turbo car might not have such parameters, I don't know. I have seen a ProCharger in a 440 oin a Duster, but it was pretty crowded... The oil pump sticks out where my power steering pump has to go...

I did finally have to give up the A/C in the interest of weight distribution (that cast 2-cylinder pump is H-E-A-V-Y....) but, I probably won't miss it.

Thanks again for all your efforts to explain away the unexplainable; it was entertaining.

[Jim Wahl]

I just want to be clear on this, you have no problem with above factory spec boost at Divisional or National Open races, that's not a problem, but only at National events the boost should be restricted. Do you not see how silly this sounds Bill? BTW Bill what class do you run? I can't seem to find your name on ANY of the many qualifying sheets I have gone over. I did answer your question, you just chose not to accept it. Now I have a question for you:

Why do you believe all other combinations deserve to be able to strive to use their equipment to its maximum legal limits but turbo combos should not be allowed? Please do not say "because I don't think it's fair". That makes you sound like a real whiner.

You know throughout the history of Drag Racing there have been combos that had advantages and also disadvantages. You have to weigh both and decide if it's worth racing. Every racer wants an advantage.Turbo cars may have their advantages but they certainly have their disadvantages. You don't hear me saying "hey my turbo car is inconsistent, you need to limit your car so it is as inconsistent as mine."

I don't think there is anything in the rule book that limits the number of times freaky one off combs can qualify #1. If that were true Bob Shaw would be a golfer not a drag racer. Jim

[Jim Wahl]

Here's another answer to your question, are you ready? Here you go...... BECAUSE THEY CAN!

Race cars don't race by demographics Bill. And this "problem" affects you how? Jim

[bill dedman]

No, they race by rules. Not demographics.

Rules are there to ensure parity. It's a difficult and multi-faceted job, trying to maintain a level playing field.

"Because they can...." is only part of the sentence.

The rest of it, in, "Because they can, due to their ability to make their own "atmosphere" through boost levels that are not commensurate with what the engine saw when it was tested for output by the factory." That factory figure is thrown into a cocked hat when the boost is cranked up.

The result?

A percentage of #1 qualifiers at national events that is in no way relative to the "population" in the ranks of that type of car. If ten percent of the cars running are fuel injected, the reasonable expectation is that one in ten #1 qualifiers will be injected, or at least, somewhere around that figure.

This is not the case with the turbo cars, however; they qualify #1 at at least five times the number of national events that you'd expect them to, given their (population) "numbers."

I don't know why that syndrome isn't being played out at points races, but, it's not. I don't think that including those races into the "mix" condones what is happening at the nationaals, though. It's apples and oranges, to me.

Not much else to say; we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, Jim.

Happy boosting...

[Jim Wahl]

Did you miss my questions Bill?
What class do you race?
How does this affect you?
And, Why do you believe all other combinations deserve to be able to strive to use their equipment to its maximum legal limits but turbo combos should not be allowed? Please do not say "because I don't think it's fair". That makes you sound like a real whiner.

Thank you, Jim

[bill dedman]

Jim asked, "Did you miss my questions, Bill?"

I guess I did.... Must not have thought they were of much importance to the subject "national event qualifying as regards turbo cars."
But, the one about "What class do you run?" had already been answered on page seven when I posted: "As far as my car goes, I wanted to retain my power steering, power brakes and air conditioning, because it's just a street car that sees action in Brackets from time-to-time." Guess you missed that.

Then you asked "How does this affect you?"
It makes me sick to my stomach when I see things go on, contunuously, that are damaging to our favorite sport. Especially, things like this, that could be easily fixed, but no one in power seems to care. They either don't CARE, or they're too dense to recognize a problem when they see it. NHRA has become, over the years, increasingly profit-oriented, and the guys empowered to watch over the rulesmaking system are NOTHING like the people who did that job thirty years ago. They just don't seem to care, if it's not going to make the organization a buck, and fixing this, won't.

There is a cliche that people use (over-use) on this board that maybe some people buy into, but I think that most don't, and that is to claim that anyone who protests an injustice is "whining." It is meant to demean the person who has pointed out the problem, but what it really does is identify the accuser as a small-minded person who wants to "kill the meesenger," to attack the person instead of the cause.

Racers with any sense of fair play will tell you that to point out a problem that affects ALL national event participants in Stock, is not "whining," but is a rational approach to something that needs attention. That is what these discussion boards are for; the free exchange of ideas. Killing the messenger won't solve the problem.

I don't race a class car, and probably won't, but I love drag racing, and it needs some rule adjustments from time-to-time, and I feel that this is one of those times. It won't affect me, personally, one way or another if it gets changed, or if it doesn't.... EXCEPT that the carefully-executed fair-play that has always exemplified Stock Eliminator would be enhanced if this situation were rectified, I believe. There's no reason to allow it to continue.

My opinion is just that.... my opinion. So is yours.
.

[Dwight Southerland]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

No, they race by rules. Not demographics.

Rules are there to ensure parity. It's a difficult and multi-faceted job, trying to maintain a level playing field.

The rules were never designed to "ensure parity" of performance, only to be defined, acceptable modifications and a classification standard. This common misconception of fairness is a myth that empowers people to whine and gripe because they feel they are being treated unfairly if they cannot be as fast relative to their index as someone else. The major driving force for adjusting HP ratings or rules for any type of parity is to appease the racers so they will continue to come back and race. (Always follow the $$) Maybe there is still some level of actual pure competition involved in our minds, but it does not actually exist in current drag racing definition at the level of, say, Olympic games competition. It would be great if it were to move back toward that ideal, but then we wouldn't have breakout racing, would we?

The allowable modifications have always resulted in favor for some combination. And the fact that performance is defined by relative standards is another issue. If NHRA artibrarily decided that Jim's index was 11.00, he would not be in the spotlight for being able to qualify so well, would he?

Originally Posted by bill dedman

The result?

A percentage of #1 qualifiers at national events that is in no way relative to the "population" in the ranks of that type of car. If ten percent of the cars running are fuel injected, the reasonable expectation is that one in ten #1 qualifiers will be injected, or at least, somewhere around that figure.

Bill, the percentage comparison you state has NEVER been the case in all the years of racing I have observed. Have 73% of the #1 qualifiers been Chevrolets? I believe that the last figures I saw showed that 73% of the participants in Stock Eliminator drive Chevrolets. Bob Shaw by himself will see to it that it will never happen.

Some combinations are always in the spotlight for their ability to out-qualify the majority of the field. A few years ago, the SS/AA Hemis were consistently the top qualifiers in SS. Currently, you have Bob Dennis doing the same thing. The FI cars in Stock were the target of complaints not too long ago. The 396 Chevrolets still consistently turn in top-of-the-field performances. It all comes down to a complicated set of circumstances that includes the factors of technical advancements from the racers and rules or classification anomolies that work together to result in these performances. If you think that there is an undue advantage for the turbo cars, then write NHRA, don't gripe to Jim about it. He's just being a smart racer.

The lack of parity that NHRA will respond to will be racers in the same class with Jim who have a sufficent population of cars that cannot keep up with him. If they complain and show justifiable reason, NHRA will simply add some numbers to Jim's power factor. Of course, Jim can get that adjustment without any help from anybody else through the AFHS.

How are tech people going monitor turbo boost even with a gauge? F1 cars have computer controlled electronic waste gates that vary the boost and are adjustable from the driver's seat. Do you really think it cold be controlled?

My $.02 and ramblings.

[bill dedman]

Dwight,

I realize that most of what you say is true; that it isn't a perfect workd, and parity is never going to exist with the huge variety of cars that populate the Stocker ranks. What I see here is a situation that MAYBE could be made better through boost monitoring.

Here's how it could work, since you asked ("How are tech people going monitor turbo boost even with a gauge? F1 cars have computer controlled electronic waste gates that vary the boost and are adjustable from the driver's seat. Do you really think it could be controlled?")

The Tech department would have to find out from the manufacrurers, what the maximum boost level; was when the engine was dyno'd for its original "advertised" horsepower rating. That number, let's say, ten pounds, goes into a book that is included with the other information that is kept at the scales, along with the car's shipping weight.

When the turbo car comes in for his fuel check and to be weighed after a run, the Tech looks at the NHRA-supplied telltale boost gauge to read the number the telltale needle has stoppef at. If it's over ten pounds, the car is bounced, just like if it were too light, or had fuel that wouldn't pass.

That's all there is to it.

Maybe this is unworkable from the standpoint that some of the modiofications (LEGAL ones) might cause the boost to rise above the factory figure. I am not advocating that racers who run turbo cars should be restricted from such modifications, but, when I started advocating this idea, I was under the impression that boost levels would NOT rise with camshaft, exhaust, etc. modifications. Jeff Lee agreed with me.

Jim Wahl says different.

If he's right (and, he well may be), I would no longer advocate monitoring boost levels, because I wouldn't want to restrict otherwise legal modifications on turbo cars just because it raised the boost level beyond the original figure.

If he's wrong, I think that the simplicity of this system could actually work. It would relieve the Techs at check-in time of having to be experts in the field of identifying turbo equipment on cars that they were probably not equipped to tech. They wouldn't have to know much at all, if the boost levels are going to be minitored, anyway.

But, as yu have said, NHRA has no interest in parity, even though they will toss a car for a valve that is several thousandths of an inch too small or too large. Boost is just another way of emulating a better-breathing engine.

I don't know what the answer is. I do know that the CONSISTENCY with which this anomaly occurs (turbo cars out-qualifying a huge field of normally aspirated cars at national events) doesn't seem to be going away. Maybe it just doean't matter.... There just doesn't seem to be any rational reason for it to be that way, so I thought maybe it could be "fixed."

Perhaps not.

Thanks for your thoughts on the subject; I do appreciete them!