New cars, old cars and horsepower ratings.

[Rusty2211]

Greg, I kinda like your idea, but I'd vote for bringing back the FI classes and combining sticks/autos. Then the newer cars can battle it out amongst themselves and we’d have more cars in each class. It is hard for a guy to want to spend big bucks to find .05 in a 40 year old engine when the guy with the newer car can turn a screw and pick up .50. It really takes all the fun out of class racing. Hidalgo told me last year when I was icing my car for a race with Teuton…”should have saved the ice for the beer”… Boy, he was right!

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by ALMACK

IHRA already does this.. sort-of.

Any 1980 and newer Stock body with any 1979 and older Stock engine.

All they have to do is eliminate the "1979 and older engine" in the rule book.

Im sure that with enough letters and phone calls to Mike Baker he would eliminate the "1979 and OLDER" engine requirement AND the 1980 and newer body styles in the rule book for GT stock. I put that in place many years ago and I think its time to be updated. Probibly would NOT work very well to put them in stock with the regular stockers because of the bogus HP factors they have. GT stock dosent have very many cars running in it anyway.These combos didnt even exist when I was writing the rules for stock. many years ago. He is very in tune to what the racers want and really a good guy. Only thing I see is the cars would be an IHRA ONLY combos like the crate motored cars and the existing GT stockers but that is a good thing for IHRA. Better car counts are always a good thing. Let the NHRA "die hards" keep what they have and go for it. They dont race IHRA anyway. Improved car counts would ensure that "Stock" type combos would still have a place to race in IHRA for years to come and it might surprise some of you how popular it might be. If enough want to try to get it pushed thru I will try to call him and see how it "flys" with him.

[goinbroke2]

It would have to read, "any stock engine in any stock body" not just 1980 or newer.
Then new more efficient engines could be in older cars too.

Now the interesting thing I see is on one hand people wanting to run a 68 289 (for example) in a 2005 mustang...and on the other hand others complaining that they need aftermarket heads etc because the parts are drying up!
Others say build a crate motor or allow "these parts" and "those" while others say "leave it alone".

The basic question is, "what is stock"?
Stock body, stock engine?
Stock body any stock engine?
stock body, crate engine?
Crate body, crate engine?
All of the above?

What I have is not competitive (83mustangGT) so I'm building a crate engine. Could build a StockGT too. Great choices, why? Because the rules evolved. Before the GT classes or crate engines it would forever be a bracket car.(tried to find the parts for a 82GT....just not out there) Now it can be a class car.
I guess I'm saying I agree.
It would solve the competitive issue and the parts availability issue. Can
t find any 65 352 castings and don't want aluminum? Drop in what you can find, 71 351C or supercharged 5.4L

The downside of course is trying to explain a "stock" LS engine in a "stock" 69 camaro and calling it a "stock class car" to a bracket racer! LOL!

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by goinbroke2

It would have to read, "any stock engine in any stock body" not just 1980 or newer.
Then new more efficient engines could be in older cars too.

Now the interesting thing I see is on one hand people wanting to run a 68 289 (for example) in a 2005 mustang...and on the other hand others complaining that they need aftermarket heads etc because the parts are drying up!
Others say build a crate motor or allow "these parts" and "those" while others say "leave it alone".

The basic question is, "what is stock"?
Stock body, stock engine?
Stock body any stock engine?
stock body, crate engine?
Crate body, crate engine?
All of the above?

What I have is not competitive (83mustangGT) so I'm building a crate engine. Could build a StockGT too. Great choices, why? Because the rules evolved. Before the GT classes or crate engines it would forever be a bracket car.(tried to find the parts for a 82GT....just not out there) Now it can be a class car.
I guess I'm saying I agree.
It would solve the competitive issue and the parts availability issue. Can
t find any 65 352 castings and don't want aluminum? Drop in what you can find, 71 351C or supercharged 5.4L

The downside of course is trying to explain a "stock" LS engine in a "stock" 69 camaro and calling it a "stock class car" to a bracket racer! LOL!

Like Elvis.....REAL "Stock" left the building after 1971. Later on the newer stock left the building in 1985 (any springs and lift check only on the cams, etc..). Most younger guys were not around back in the day so todays jumbled mess is all they know.

[Hemi Moose]

Originally Posted by Greg Hill

Since it looks like NHRA is not going to properly factor these new cars and Ford is going to continue to bring out slightly different combinations each year I would propose that the older cars should be able to run these motors in stock also. I think this is only fair since none of these new cars came with the motors they are running. All you would have to do is make the GM fast burn motor legal for GM cars at around 300 hp so we would have something comparable to the Ford 352 and the Dodge 360. I know this sounds like heresy coming from me but I think it's the only answer to keep a lot of the old cars and old guys competing in the next few years.

I truly thought about going to Indy this year for the first time since 2008, but I opened up the entries list and there was a new mustang and a new challenger in my class and that made my mind up not to go. Even though I have a pretty fast E/SA car I would be a half second behind these two new cars. Now if I would of had a fast burn crate motor it could of been a pretty good race. This probably sound pretty radical, but because NHRA has chosen to not properly factor these cars, I don't see any other way around the problem. I would much rather see these combinations factored where they should be, but it seems like that's not going to happen.

Just imagine Larry Hill getting to run one of the new hemis in his old Cuda. How about Verne Buchannan, Gary Glazner, or Tex Miller being able to run the Ford 352 crate motor? What about Robbie Shaw, Caleb McFarland, Jim Boudreau, or jimmy DeFrank getting the new Chevy 427. How about the Chrysler 360 in a duster or an old Cuda? Or how about one of the new blower motors in a 69 Camaro or a 68 Mustang? This is not my ideal fix for the problem of all these under rated combinations but it would go a long way to making a more level playing field.

I've been thinking something like this for awhile now...but I figured I'd keep my yap shut because I'd probably get laughed off of these forums! It would be nice to see some of these newer power plants shoe-horned into some of the older vehicles, and might bring some new blood into the sport because not everyone can afford a brand new factory race car.

[442OLDS]

Originally Posted by Greg Hill

I truly thought about going to Indy this year for the first time since 2008, but I opened up the entries list and there was a new mustang and a new challenger in my class and that made my mind up not to go. Even though I have a pretty fast E/SA car I would be a half second behind these two new cars. Now if I would of had a fast burn crate motor it could of been a pretty good race.

I will see you at the Sportsnationals in a few days and if we race in class,I will be a half second behind you.

You would have qualified at Indy (must be nice) and you might have won at Indy had you entered.

Isn't that more important than being the winner of E/SA?

[Jeff Lee]

Want more participation at NHRA events with the "older / traditional" Stock Eliminator cars?

Want to see a qualifying sheet that is not top heavy with late model factory drag cars that leave you with no desire to participate?

Don't want the expense of having a new "crate Engine" class and making your old 350 / 255 Chevy obsolete and having to buy a 383 Vortec engine trying to keep up with the new factory Super Cars?

Do you want to give the new cars a run for their money?

Drum roll.......reduce the HP of ALL 1992 and OLDER vehicles in the class guide BY FIVE PERCENT! No index changes, just an across the board 5%
reduction in HP. For EVERYBODY. This is not complicated. Take 5% off.

Why 1992? Because the LT1 started in 1993. They had their gift already.

I don't care if your combo just had 20 HP taken off last month for whatever reason. Bam! Take another 5% off the weight. Index stays the same.
I don't care that you built your car with the heaviest parts you could find and you can't make the new minimum. You have 3 classes you can run in. Pick one.

AHFS trigger? I don't know. I'm thinking it should remain the same. But I'd sure like the trigger to be based on the 1/8th mile ET.

Thank you. Let the arrows fly.

[cutta]

Originally Posted by jeff lee

want more participation at nhra events with the "older / traditional" stock eliminator cars?

Want to see a qualifying sheet that is not top heavy with late model factory drag cars that leave you with no desire to participate?

Don't want the expense of having a new "crate engine" class and making your old 350 / 255 chevy obsolete and having to buy a 383 vortec engine trying to keep up with the new factory super cars?

Do you want to give the new cars a run for their money?

Drum roll.......reduce the hp of all 1992 and older vehicles in the class guide by five percent! No index changes, just an across the board 5%
reduction in hp. For everybody. This is not complicated. Take 5% off.

Why 1992? Because the lt1 started in 1993. They had their gift already.

I don't care if your combo just had 20 hp taken off last month for whatever reason. Bam! Take another 5% off the weight. Index stays the same.
I don't care that you built your car with the heaviest parts you could find and you can't make the new minimum. You have 3 classes you can run in. Pick one.

Ahfs trigger? I don't know. I'm thinking it should remain the same. But i'd sure like the trigger to be based on the 1/8th mile et.

Thank you. Let the arrows fly.

this!

[SS Engine Guy]

While we are throwing out ideas, catch this one: At the end of each race with all competitors available watching. Stock and Super Stock. Take four pieces of paper and on one, write 330 on another write 660, on another write 1000, and on the last write 1320. Put these four pieces of paper, folded up in a container and have a competitor from each eliminator pick a piece of paper out. Read it out loud to the crowd gathered, and that would be what the AHFS would base its statistics off of for that event.
Run data is easily aquired and a run can be completed by very simple math in almost all instances. Actually you could even include another slip of paper for MPH if it would help. All this "Playing the AHFS" has gotten dull and has caused alot of ill feelings. Its time to stop all the BS.
The two fastest cars left in class (providing that it is a well populated class) should be a few hundreths apart not a few tenths apart. And that difference should be how well a car works / tuning / driving / wrenching / etc.

[Andrew Hill]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Want more participation at NHRA events with the "older / traditional" Stock Eliminator cars?

Want to see a qualifying sheet that is not top heavy with late model factory drag cars that leave you with no desire to participate?

Don't want the expense of having a new "crate Engine" class and making your old 350 / 255 Chevy obsolete and having to buy a 383 Vortec engine trying to keep up with the new factory Super Cars?

Do you want to give the new cars a run for their money?

Drum roll.......reduce the HP of ALL 1992 and OLDER vehicles in the class guide BY FIVE PERCENT! No index changes, just an across the board 5%
reduction in HP. For EVERYBODY. This is not complicated. Take 5% off.

Why 1992? Because the LT1 started in 1993. They had their gift already.

I don't care if your combo just had 20 HP taken off last month for whatever reason. Bam! Take another 5% off the weight. Index stays the same.
I don't care that you built your car with the heaviest parts you could find and you can't make the new minimum. You have 3 classes you can run in. Pick one.

AHFS trigger? I don't know. I'm thinking it should remain the same. But I'd sure like the trigger to be based on the 1/8th mile ET.

Thank you. Let the arrows fly.

Well that makes sense, just get even more people playing the AHFS game! It would make 1000x more sense to add 5% to all post 1992 combinations, it accomplishes the same thing, but doesn't create a bunch of 1.30 under cars from 1.10 under cars.