Factory experimental

[Alan Roehrich]

Billy, on one hand, you are correct in that both instances are a somewhat fundamental change in the current rules.

However, for NHRA to adjust the cylinder head volumes because they told the racers a year ago they could legally do a more radical valve job in no way compares to NHRA allowing an OEM to hire a tuner to bring in a supercharged non factory production car.

The adjusting of the cylinder head volumes, if it happens, is a result of NHRA having to compensate for poor decisions they made, not only is it possible, even likely that their list of volumes has some errors, but before deciding to enact a cylinder head volume rule, they first allowed modifications to the heads long after the volumes were established.

This other train wreck, well, it pretty much speaks for itself.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Billy, on one hand, you are correct in that both instances are a somewhat fundamental change in the current rules.

However, for NHRA to adjust the cylinder head volumes because they told the racers a year ago they could legally do a more radical valve job in no way compares to NHRA allowing an OEM to hire a tuner to bring in a supercharged non factory production car.

The adjusting of the cylinder head volumes, if it happens, is a result of NHRA having to compensate for poor decisions they made, not only is it possible, even likely that their list of volumes has some errors, but before deciding to enact a cylinder head volume rule, they first allowed modifications to the heads long after the volumes were established.

This other train wreck, well, it pretty much speaks for itself.

Alan, when the SS runner volumes were originally posted they were somewhat enlarged at that time. What we NOW have is a specific number for NHRA to use as a tool to better do their job. Too big, too small, it's a number and we can't exceed that number. Just because the rules say that you can "pocket port" your "Stock" head and use a "backcut" valve doesn't mean that you have to. I've been getting told that by the "genuises" in this sport for years. If your head measures too big then I guess that you'd better put a thick valve in it or start fresh and don't get so "piggy" with the bowl hog. I will say again, "we have all brought this on ourselves by allowing a perversion of the rules for years".

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Alan, when the SS runner volumes were originally posted they were somewhat enlarged at that time. What we NOW have is a specific number for NHRA to use as a tool to better do their job. Too big, too small, it's a number and we can't exceed that number. Just because the rules say that you can "pocket port" your "Stock" head and use a "backcut" valve doesn't mean that you have to. I've been getting told that by the "genuises" in this sport for years. If your head measures too big then I guess that you'd better put a thick valve in it or start fresh and don't get so "piggy" with the bowl hog. I will say again, "we have all brought this on ourselves by allowing a perversion of the rules for years".

What we now have is a number. How good is it? I'm not sure we really know. With all due respect to the actual tech guys in the field, and I do have a tremendous amount of respect and yes, admiration for many of them, regardless of this "tool", or any other "tool", NHRA itself will probably not use it to "do a better job". After all, why should it change now? From what I've seen, guys like Travis, Wesley, Dave, and Harry do the very best job they can, given what NHRA actually allows them to do.

Now, with regards to "bowl hogs" and necked down valves, if you race, and you have to face pretty good odds of getting heads up races, or you desire to be competitive in class, then you must take advantage of the rules NHRA gives you. If they say a valve that flows better than the rest is legal, you pretty much have no choice but to run it, again, if you want to go fast and win. If they change a rule to allow more valve job modifications, you don't have a lot of choice, unless you don't mind getting beat. Do you have to do it? No, no one is forcing you. But, you did come to race didn't you?

Have the rules gotten way out of control? Yes, absolutely. Did the average racers really have a choice, or a say in the matter? Not really. Most of the current perversion and looseness is a lot more of a result of NHRA (not to be confused with the tech staff in the field) not wanting to invest the time and effort in tech inspection, rather than a result of racers wanting the rules opened up. Sure, some racers can have the blame for this laid squarely at their feet, because they were the ones who got caught with the cheated up parts to begin with. But it was NHRA that decided to make them legal, rather than have to look at them.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

What we now have is a number. How good is it? I'm not sure we really know. With all due respect to the actual tech guys in the field, and I do have a tremendous amount of respect and yes, admiration for many of them, regardless of this "tool", or any other "tool", NHRA itself will probably not use it to "do a better job". After all, why should it change now? From what I've seen, guys like Travis, Wesley, Dave, and Harry do the very best job they can, given what NHRA actually allows them to do.

Now, with regards to "bowl hogs" and necked down valves, if you race, and you have to face pretty good odds of getting heads up races, or you desire to be competitive in class, then you must take advantage of the rules NHRA gives you. If they say a valve that flows better than the rest is legal, you pretty much have no choice but to run it, again, if you want to go fast and win. If they change a rule to allow more valve job modifications, you don't have a lot of choice, unless you don't mind getting beat. Do you have to do it? No, no one is forcing you. But, you did come to race didn't you?

Have the rules gotten way out of control? Yes, absolutely. Did the average racers really have a choice, or a say in the matter? Not really. Most of the current perversion and looseness is a lot more of a result of NHRA (not to be confused with the tech staff in the field) not wanting to invest the time and effort in tech inspection, rather than a result of racers wanting the rules opened up. Sure, some racers can have the blame for this laid squarely at their feet, because they were the ones who got caught with the cheated up parts to begin with. But it was NHRA that decided to make them legal, rather than have to look at them.

Alan, I've read and reread your last post a few times now and I don't know where you're coming from. Nobody has more respect for the Tech guys than I do. Any racer that would give a questionable piece to a Tech guy to look at is DISrespecting him. Getting tossed by a Tech guy and going over his head is DISrespect. Agreed? They now have a given number to compare specific castings to. You're over, you're out. No more going over his head. Period. Black and white. Agreed? Now with regards to bowl hogs and valves, you will have to go pretty far to find a more competitive person than I am BUT if somebody beats me in a heads up run or bumps me from a full field and is legal then I have no problem with that. Agreed? Have the rules gotten out of control? No doubt. Did the average racer really have a choice? Yes we did. We all knew what rules were being "perverted" and let it happen. At Indy a few years back I got in a heated "discussion" with a young man that told me;"Where I grew up we called guys like you a rat" to which I replied "Where I grew up we called guys like you cheaters". Since then I share my thoughts with my close friends and leave it at that. Average racers have allowed other racers to "pervert" and manipulate the rules to a point that it becomes the norm. Period. Agreed? We have brought all of this on ourselves by ignoring it all. Agreed?

[Alan Roehrich]

At this point, we're getting way off topic here. I think we've pretty much hijacked this thread more than we should. I've enjoyed the discussion, and I do see where you are coming from, we probably agree a lot more than is evident.

The subject at hand, however, is not the rules in general, but the rules as they apply to whether or not a car is eligible for the class.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

At this point, we're getting way off topic here. I think we've pretty much hijacked this thread more than we should. I've enjoyed the discussion, and I do see where you are coming from, we probably agree a lot more than is evident.

The subject at hand, however, is not the rules in general, but the rules as they apply to whether or not a car is eligible for the class.

Alan, how are we getting off topic? NHRA is breaking their own rules! It IS the rules in general that has let this happen!

[Alan Roehrich]

Billy,
I never said you had anything but respect for the tech guys in the field. That was not the point. The point was that NHRA often does not allow them to do their job, regardless of the "tools" they have at hand. I never questioned your respect for them. I only questioned their superiors, and I don't mean guys like Bob Lang either. I'm talking about Glendora.

Yes, I know you are competitive. Never doubted that. That wasn't being debated at all.

The point is that for 2008 deeper and more radical valve jobs became legal, and necked down valves with a back cut were already legal. And for 2008 heads were not poured in Stock for the purpose of determining legality. Now, in 2009, a year after racers were told it was legal to do those modifications, and it was obvious to anyone that those modifications would affect runner volume, heads are being poured in Stock for the purpose of determining legality. The point being that NHRA told racers their expensive valves were legal, and they could modify their heads (some of which are difficult, if not nearly impossible to find). Then after allowing things with one rule, they make those same things illegal with another. That's an NHRA problem they created for the racers.

I do not condone cheating either, I don't like it, never have, never will.

However, I do not think you are being fair when you claim the loose rules are the fault of the racers. Len Imbrogno worked for NHRA, and wasn't able to do much. After he left, the SRAC was formed, and already, less than a year later, at least Woodro and Greg have resigned, citing a lack of respect and a lack of real input despite all of their efforts. If NHRA refused to listen to them, what makes you think the average racers have any more truly effective input. NHRA apparently pays little attention to the average racers, and likely even less now than in the past. They take what they want from what little actual racer input they actually pay any attention to or acknowledge. So the perversion and looseness is a whole lot more a result of NHRA than of racers.

I do not agree that things (other than the racers themselves) have been ignored. Much has been made of many problems, and many suggestions and solutions have been offered. The vast majority of it has not necessarily ignored by the average racer. By NHRA maybe, but not always the average racer. And after a while, the average guy, doing this for fun, gets tired of banging his head against the wall, and coming away with nothing except a bloody forehead, a headache, and an empty wallet. So he carries on as best he can.

I suppose we could all be blamed for not just parking the cars and the rigs and staying home until we got our way. I guess we can be blamed for lacking unity and being able to act in the interest of the entire group, that probably is a valid point.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Alan, how are we getting off topic? NHRA is breaking their own rules! It IS the rules in general that has let this happen!

I disagree Billy.

We agree the rules are out of control.

NHRA will break their own rules for the right amount of money, regardless of what the rules are when the money is offered.

[Billy Nees]

Alan, I think that you and I are going toward the same place from different sides of the fence. Dwydendorf, if I am running Stock Eliminator and it includes a car that doesn't "fit" the eliminator, even though I may not run the same class as that car, then that car (or any other not legal car) has a bearing on how I qualify, who I will race, whether I may have a bye or not and if I even make the field so, yes it concerns me.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Alan, I think that you and I are going toward the same place from different sides of the fence. Dwydendorf, if I am running Stock Eliminator and it includes a car that doesn't "fit" the eliminator, even though I may not run the same class as that car, then that car (or any other not legal car) has a bearing on how I qualify, who I will race, whether I may have a bye or not and if I even make the field so, yes it concerns me.

Billy, I am sure we are. We do agree on many, if not most points, we just do not exactly agree on how we got here. It's all good as far as that goes.

And your point on how the new cars will make a difference to everyone is excellent.