Index Change

[Mike Carr]

Did anyone notice this line near the end?

"Runs of 1.250 or more under the index will be reviewed and adjusted Tuesday following the event. Runs at National Events, Divisional Events, and National Open Events, including those at altitude factored race tracks, are included in the 1.250-second-or-more-under analysis".

If I am reading this correctly, this means that a car at Altitude that runs -1.250 now gets HP the same as a car at Sea Level that runs -1.250? If so, I applaud NHRA for fixing this glaring disparity.

[Jeff Teuton]

Mike, I think it has been that way. Wasn't that the big deal with Sorenson last year when he dumped the water or something? It's the same as running 1.55 under in 2009. And when the semi-annual adjustments, the new average will be .15 faster than last years 1.00 under average, but with the.3 drop, the effect is a 1.15 under in 2009 average sorta like the 396 guys are commenting about.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Mike Carr

Did anyone notice this line near the end?

"Runs of 1.250 or more under the index will be reviewed and adjusted Tuesday following the event. Runs at National Events, Divisional Events, and National Open Events, including those at altitude factored race tracks, are included in the 1.250-second-or-more-under analysis".

If I am reading this correctly, this means that a car at Altitude that runs -1.250 now gets HP the same as a car at Sea Level that runs -1.250? If so, I applaud NHRA for fixing this glaring disparity.

Actually, that's a bad idea. Why? Because NHRA does not consider the current local weather conditions at factored tracks, and adjust the factored index accordingly. I've seen days where the actual conditions at Denver, a factored track, were 1500' better than Bristol, an non factored track. A track that is factored at 3000' could see local current weather that was actually closer to 1900'. Since they don't adjust the factored indexes to account for that, it'd be ludicrous put HP on a car for running 1.25 under the factored index.

If a car were to run 1.250 under the sea level index, then of course, it needs HP. But it already works that way now.

[Wade_Owens]

Originally Posted by Mike Carr

Did anyone notice this line near the end?

"Runs of 1.250 or more under the index will be reviewed and adjusted Tuesday following the event. Runs at National Events, Divisional Events, and National Open Events, including those at altitude factored race tracks, are included in the 1.250-second-or-more-under analysis".

If I am reading this correctly, this means that a car at Altitude that runs -1.250 now gets HP the same as a car at Sea Level that runs -1.250? If so, I applaud NHRA for fixing this glaring disparity.

Mike, I noticed that also, and wondered the same thing......

[keith ohanesian]

This by far the biggest joke That has ever happend in NHRA. The people that are making these rules have no clue what they are doing to the futher of stock and super stock! How many young people are entering these classes? NONE !!! I'm with them time for two 60mm turbos and some mini tubes f this s@#$!!!!

[Tracy Robbins]

I know a lot of you guys don't like "hood scoop" cars but this really hurts those of us on a tight budget. The comp...uhhh I mean new style modified cars w/ the $50,000 engines have already dropped some of the indexs and now another .30 is going to finish off some of us who don't have the funding to keep up w/ these guys. Bristol would now be out of the question for me unless that's an altitude adjusted track (not sure). Could save me some money, but regardless if I race any NHRA I will be at the very bottom of the sheet. The question is...will this change bring in more cars than it will run off? It appears to me that they need more cars as they are now opening up nationals to more classes so this decision doesn't make good financial sense. Just my .02

[Chris "drooze" Wertman]

Hmmmmm a Challnger Drag Pak with a completed motor, and a HOOD scoop, was 35 out the door, half of that is engine cost, damm near.

Takes another 15 to make it ready, but thats 50 in the whole car. Its amazing (other than our cage and suspension work we paid to have done, were doing it all ourselves.....

Still cheaper than an SCJ by a bunch.

Originally Posted by Tracy Robbins

I know a lot of you guys don't like "hood scoop" cars but this really hurts those of us on a tight budget. The comp...uhhh I mean new style modified cars w/ the $50,000 engines have already dropped some of the indexs and now another .30 is going to finish off some of us who don't have the funding to keep up w/ these guys. Bristol would now be out of the question for me unless that's an altitude adjusted track (not sure). Could save me some money, but regardless if I race any NHRA I will be at the very bottom of the sheet. The question is...will this change bring in more cars than it will run off? It appears to me that they need more cars as they are now opening up nationals to more classes so this decision doesn't make good financial sense. Just my .02

[Tracy Robbins]

Originally Posted by drooze

Hmmmmm a Challnger Drag Pak with a completed motor, and a HOOD scoop, was 35 out the door, half of that is engine cost, damm near.

Takes another 15 to make it ready, but thats 50 in the whole car. Its amazing (other than our cage and suspension work we paid to have done, were doing it all ourselves.....

Still cheaper than an SCJ by a bunch.

Sounds like a sweet car...is this a stocker or a superstocker?

[SuperStockDodge]

Wow, now this is the best Christmas gift ever! Thanks NHRA!