Index Change

[DIC GEARY]

Mike.

To get HP in Denver you have to run 1.25 under the sea level index...But, you pose a great question...maybe some one from NHRA can clarify it for us...

[hadtobethere]

Originally Posted by Rich Wallin

this did nothing but penalize the part time racer trying to go out and compete, factor the fast combo's as needed, this is a crock

well.....the index was 30 plus years old, change is good

[Rich Wallin]

change the factoring process, not the index

[Alan Roehrich]

Not only are the track "factors" suspect, but the system is flawed.

You call racing at altitude "having your cake, and eating it too". But when you get a combination HP running off of a bogus factor, you're "having your cake and eating someone else's too".

If NHRA is not going to correct the factors to the actual current local conditions, then they need to do just what they've been doing, only hitting cars with HP if they actually go 1.25 under the sea level index.

Again, if the track is factored to over 3000', but local conditions actually correct to 1000', that's like having better than -1000' under sea level at some place like Atco or Mission. A car running 1.25 or more under the factored index at the factored track probably wouldn't go more than 1.00 under at a non factored track in really good air.

[Rich67stang]

Running ss/cm index @ ss/em weight....great!,thanks!...

[Mike Carr]

Thanks Mr Geary (I don't like calling anyone Dick, unless they deserve it. LOL).

Alan, I would agree with all of what you wrote. Wonder if NHRA would?

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Mike Carr

Alan, I would agree with all of what you wrote. Wonder if NHRA would?

Mike, I seriously doubt it. I don't think they allow common sense at Glendora.

A blind man could easily see what this whole index.AHFS charade is all about, and it began about a year ago. I saw this coming when the first signs showed up.

Just another sign that NHRA does not belong to us, the racers, anymore. It hasn't in quite some time, and it is only getting worse. It's a damned shame.

[Alan Roehrich]

From what I was told, there is "some" truth in what NHRA claims. The SRAC did suggest lowering the indexes, according to a few I spoke with. But they also suggested correcting the AHFS as well. So NHRA lowered the indexes and left the AHFS completely screwed up. Go figure.

[Dave Casey]

I hope that finally they will treat runs at altitude the same as at sea level,

1.25 under sea level index gets hit,

then 1.25 under altitude index should get hit.

If those correction figures are good enough to let records be set,than they are good enough to factor horsepower period...

as far as the weather argument goes, it is simple, there are good days and bad days at all tracks, good air happens, bad air happens, and mother nature don't care if it is Atco or Denver,but one thing doesn't change and that is the distance above sea level each track is.

There is no chance that a sanctioning body is going to make adjustments for daily air density. They are looking to keep it simple, not add more complicated work. The closest thing to that I have ever seen was when there was a good tail wind and our D1 director wouldn't let us set records, I doubt that you would see that now.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Dave Casey

I hope that finally they will treat runs at altitude the same as at sea level,

1.25 under sea level index gets hit,

then 1.25 under altitude index should get hit.

If those correction figures are good enough to let records be set,than they are good enough to factor horsepower period...

as far as the weather argument goes, it is simple, there are good days and bad days at all tracks, good air happens, bad air happens, and mother nature don't care if it is Atco or Denver,but one thing doesn't change and that is the distance above sea level each track is.

There is no chance that a sanctioning body is going to make adjustments for daily air density. They are looking to keep it simple, not add more complicated work. The closest thing to that I have ever seen was when there was a good tail wind and our D1 director wouldn't let us set records, I doubt that you would see that now.

I'll have to disagree with that completely. It won't work, and it is insanely unfair.

Atco, Mission, and Woodburn are all sea level or close to it. I don't think you'll ever see local weather conditions at any of those tracks correct to 1500' or more below sea level. But factored tracks do have weather that corrects to 2000' below their factored altitude. There's no such thing as a day so good at Atco, Mission, or Woodburn that the air is 2000' below sea level. So the argument that "there are good days and bad days at all tracks" doesn't hold water. Not when there are plenty of track that could never see "good days" like that. It would be absurd to factor a combination because of a run that couldn't possibly be duplicated at an unfactored track. That's one of the few things NHRA has gotten correct.

One run at a track factored at 3500' that had 1500' conditions could render a lot of cars completely useless. Especially since they lowered the indexes 3 tenths. And that run could never be duplicated under actual normal conditions.

The fact that NHRA wants to be cheap and lazy, so they don't correct their factors, is no reason to punish racers.