1.20 under at Belle Rose

[B Parker]

I've been on here preaching for a while now about the AHFS needs to be brought up to date. How long has it been the same!!!! Not many of you jumped on board. In those kind of conditions I bet there are a lot of combo's that could go 1.20 or more under. I personal wished more went 1.20 under. BP

[Glenn Briglio]

Originally Posted by HR9121

Mineshaft yes but 1.20 under is still an instant hit ofcourse. From what I was told the weather was it was incredibly fast and all I can say is under those circumstances he may have not known how fast he was going.

Fast enough to take .17 at finish line. More than a car length At 116 mph

[kwm]

Originally Posted by HR9121

Does anyone know exactly what combo LaPorte was running, now that I think about it I thought he ran the 241 combo not the 272 350 combo?

Cooter, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but according to the tech card on Drag Racer TV it is a 245/272 350

[G Schenck]

Originally Posted by Glenn Briglio

Fast enough to take .17 at finish line. More than a car length At 116 mph

It might have been a car length but it appears he was dumped at the stripe, which is hard to control.

Greg

[Jason]

Has anyone ever thought about taking enough weight out to be light at the scales on the first qualifying run? That way you could run flat out just to see how quick your car would run at that event. Even a 1.20 under run would not count because the car would be too light across the scales.

[Mepprecht]

Originally Posted by Jason

Has anyone ever thought about taking enough weight out to be light at the scales on the first qualifying run? That way you could run flat out just to see how quick your car would run at that event. Even a 1.20 under run would not count because the car would be too light across the scales.

that is completely false. 1.20 under and under weight is still a hit. look back at last year D6.

[Mike Pearson]

Originally Posted by HR9121

Mineshaft yes but 1.20 under is still an instant hit ofcourse. From what I was told the weather was it was incredibly fast and all I can say is under those circumstances he may have not known how fast he was going.

OK. I thought that was the reason for the "Mineshaft rule" to keep the combos from getting hit when the conditions were stupid fast like this past weekend. I didn't realize that if you still went 1.2 under you got hit with instant HP when the class met the mineshaft requirement . That probably needs to be changed.

[Bruce Noland]

Originally Posted by Mike Pearson

OK. I thought that was the reason for the "Mineshaft rule" to keep the combos from getting hit when the conditions were stupid fast like this past weekend. I didn't realize that if you still went 1.2 under you got hit with instant HP when the class met the mineshaft requirement . That probably needs to be changed.

The ahfs is a flawed system as it is. There is no need to weaken it any further. But racers do need to use some common sense when in mineshaft conditions.

[rognelson777]

i am still amazed in this day and age the only thing nhra uses is ET to change indexes. they need to use horsepower correction factor along with the ET that was run.
With the weather reading/ tracking technology that has evolved since the 1970's i have to believe there is a realative easy way to establish a system to decide if it was just great conditions or a great run.
as someone who raced on 0 elevation tracks (atco et al)and then going to indy, 1000ft +/- , can see there needs to be some way to level the numbers.
and i know there will still be arguements, but with hand held weather station devices able to calculate correction factors on the spot, there has to be a way to make it work 99pct of the time.

[James Perrone]

The only problem I see is the car was on kill. And it shows
Now a little self control would have helped.
I will never understand why someone would try to go that fast you got a put a limit on yourself