Once again a bogus combination

[Dean Roberts]

Alan, your spin on reality is funny. Most agree that the engines are clearly underrated. OK, we get it. and I know the LT1 engine was already in the book, however, by '98 GM stopped using that engine in the F-body. So, why is it OK for GM to do what ford and Dodge are doing?

Your answer is "two wrongs don't make a right," but I don't see you lobbying to have those cars removed from competition? Nor does Greg care about that. Again, I ask why? Because the engine was already legal?

OK, two wrongs don't make a right. We heard that, boo hoo. This is reality and life is not fair. It's not fair in the workplace, on the sportsfield and in racing. Someone always has the advantage and now it's Dodge and Ford having a chance in the limelight. Yes, the cars are underrated, but Stock will not go away, people will race and have plenty of fun.

NHRA set precedent by allowing GM to run this car, period! The level of performance is irrelevant.

[Bruce Noland]

Many precedents don't turn out so well. In the real world the precedent you reference here would be quickly reversed.

Also, you left out a very important point. Pay to Play. That is what nhra and the OEMs have been up to for a very long time. We all have a better understanding of this corrupt process because of this site. Even ten years ago the racers did not have this valuable asset to get together and figure out what is actually going on here. Remember the muffler deal. The Internet sites helped to prevent that deal from going down. And the Internet sites helped move the GM cars into injected classes. So we are moving in the right direction now. It will soon become the norm around racing that a sanctioning body will not be allowed to "feed" off of it's membership. Even though at least one sanctioning body claims to have no members.

Yes, it's easy to look back now and see that nhra made, what I consider, underhanded deals. And just because they got away with this behavior in the past does not mean that they should get away with it today. Times have changed and nhra will have to change it's practices as well.

Why do the new crate motor cars have to run in regular Stock classes? How is anybody injured by placing them in injected classes? Injected classes made a lot of sense before - why not now?

[Evan Smith]

Bruce, personally, I hated the injected classes and so did many other racers. During those years my car was no faster than a good-running carbureted 305 Camaro, or a 360 or 283, but I got to race myself for five years. BORING! While the LT1 cars were very fast, there were many EFI racers with cars that were not killers and they blended nicely in the regular classes.

It was much more fun racing you, Henry, Stevie and Bobby F. and the rest of the Jr. Stockers.

I understand your point about underrated cars, but segregation is not the answer.

[Bruce Noland]

Originally Posted by Evan Smith

Bruce, personally, I hated the injected classes and so did many other racers. During those years my car was no faster than a good-running carbureted 305 Camaro, or a 360 or 283, but I got to race myself for five years. BORING! While the LT1 cars were very fast, there were many EFI racers with cars that were not killers and they blended nicely in the regular classes.

It was much more fun racing you, Henry, Stevie and Bobby F. and the rest of the Jr. Stockers.

I understand your point about underrated cars, but segregation is not the answer.

Evan,
Segregation sounds punitive. Separated classes is what we are after. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the injected classses. We were very evenly matched in those days and we did have some fun. But this is a different deal. Some folks are saying, well this is just like the GM deal. It's not. And some people would like us to believe the bogus crate motor Horsepower factors are pay back for not standing up to the bully the last time around.

This latest headache from nhra cuts across 20 different classes in Stock alone. The GM deal was a minor infringement to the membership compared to this one. So what is so bad about putting these crate motor cars in their own classes? It's important to remember that we have been debating this issue for more than a year and the intensity has grown rather than diminished. We will be kicking this thing around this time next year if the racers don't come to some reasonable compromise. I spoke to several racers who were racing at Las Vegas this weekend and they told me that the crate motor cars are causing a lot of negative buz for nhra.

So, I ask one more time. Who is hurt by nhra placing the new crate motor cars in injected classes within the Stock category? IHRA has shown real leadership by placing the new cars in injected classes. Why not nhra?

[Wayne Kerr]

Bruce, you asked, Who is hurt by nhra placing the new crate motor cars in injected classes within the Stock category?"
I believe the component (cam, tires, etc.) manufacturers that support the Stock and Super Stock classes are hurt by having seperate classes. They are not getting any benefit from having one car per class. Class eliminations are becoming "single fests". At Charlotte in stock there were 28 Stock class elimination runs, 12 were singles. That's not going to help grow manufacturer support is it?
I'm not an "old timer" but I have been competing since the mid 80's.
Can someone tell me about class participation/ eliminations prior to 1985?

My pipe dream would be to have fewer classes, simpler tech inspection, more competition, and more contingency support for class winners.
If the guys like Ken Meile could "push" the CJ's and DP's to run sub 1.00 et's at a National for a class win, then perhaps the AHFS could actually work in a timely fashion.

See you at the races,
Wayne Kerr

[hemidup]

Our factory DP crate motor? What a joke and BIG disappointment.

[Jeff Lee]

I'll bet 9 out of 10 Stock eliminator racers that don't own a '97 or '98 Camaro couldn't visually tell a '97 Camaro from a '98 Camaro. The LT-1 was produced for street use.
Quit focusing on the past! (and I was quite vocal on the soft HP of the LT-1 / LS-1; but at least they were built for the public!)

[Bruce Noland]

Originally Posted by Wayne Kerr

Bruce, you asked, Who is hurt by nhra placing the new crate motor cars in injected classes within the Stock category?"
I believe the component (cam, tires, etc.) manufacturers that support the Stock and Super Stock classes are hurt by having seperate classes. They are not getting any benefit from having one car per class. Class eliminations are becoming "single fests". At Charlotte in stock there were 28 Stock class elimination runs, 12 were singles. That's not going to help grow manufacturer support is it?
I'm not an "old timer" but I have been competing since the mid 80's.
Can someone tell me about class participation/ eliminations prior to 1985?

My pipe dream would be to have fewer classes, simpler tech inspection, more competition, and more contingency support for class winners.
If the guys like Ken Meile could "push" the CJ's and DP's to run sub 1.00 et's at a National for a class win, then perhaps the AHFS could actually work in a timely fashion.

See you at the races,
Wayne Kerr

Wayne,
Sorry you don't like extra classes. The manufacturers' support is not a consideration in this debate.

The AHFS was never designed to compensate for the corrupt factoring process that we are dealing with. In fact, nhra wasn't happy enough with the gifts they had given out. nhra then reduced the AHFS further by giving away .300 for good measure.

Two things that everyone seems to agree about:
1.) The crate motor cars have been given very generous factors of 100 - 150 Horsepower over the competition.
2.)The AHFS was further weakened by taking .300 off the tirggers after these crate motor combinations were "accepted".

Suppose the NFL decided to give favors to two teams. Lets say these favored teams had to play offense on an 80 yard field while their competitors had to play on a 100 yard field. Easy enough to do. All the officials would have to do is move the ball a plus 20 yards every time the ball was turned over to the favored team.

How about MLB giving favors to teams? The out field fence could be moved in 40 feet for the favored team when they are at bat and then return the fence to it's normal position when their competitors come to bat.

What about allowing special equipment for privileged Tennis players, Golfers, Hockey players, or lowering the net for one team during a basketball game?

All of the above examples would cause any competitor to claim foul. And justifiably so!

The NFL, a 501 (c) (6) just like nhra, would be hammered into the ground for trying to pull off such a stunt. Why should nhra get a pass from the racers, news media or legal system when they have actually moved the goal posts to favor a privileged few?

[Larry Hill]

Ken you will win class again if: You race Big Daddy, Get a new NEW car, race another carbuerated car without Santa Clause parts or all the new Fords and Challengers BREAK.

Good luck! To my knowledge Fletcher has been the only car to beat a new car heads up.

[Ken Miele]

Geez Larry, I didn't know my odds of wining class were that good, thanks man. Oh oh oh oh.......don't for get if I am the only one in the class.

Man, do I love this sport!