2011 ahfs

[Wade_Owens]

Originally Posted by Eric Merryfield

If the goal is to never go more than .99 under, tuning for 100% consistency and saving some money may be in vougue.....c-12 versus c-14 will slow it down a touch and save some $.....non-lightweight radials last a whole lot longer...don't have to have the super trick gun drilled axles, go for durability instead of aluminum everything in the tranny....might need to change that cam to a milder one too...still plenty of parts to buy, just a slighty different focus.
Eric

Eric, I can assure you I will never re-spend 1 dime to slow my car down......

Wade

[rustbucket79]

So with all the complaining going on the easy thing for the NHRA to do would be to lower the indexes by a half second or better and everyone can go back to searching for a better ET.

As an interested bystander it's peculiar to read the complaints on the new cars being under factored on one hand, and in the same breath these people are trying to hide their car's true performance. (1.5+ seconds under their index)

The way I see it, if everyone said screw it and ran their cars to the full potential, other than possible ladder differences (and being refactored over time) you would all be in the same boat as you are now, other than only being able to brag about running a half second or full second under their index as upposed to 1.5+. Where is the glory in having the performance but not showing it? If anything, a racer who triggers ahfs ET should be congratulated for his efforts, plus it forces others in his class to work harder, isn't that what class racing is all about after all?

If NHRA truely wanted to see the potential of every class car, they could eliminate break outs, and go off the index like the Comp racers. That would be some awesome racing to watch!

[Dave Ficacci]

Kent or Mike - Who are the other SRAC council members?

[KingReptile]

Originally Posted by rustbucket79

So with all the complaining going on the easy thing for the NHRA to do would be to lower the indexes by a half second or better and everyone can go back to searching for a better ET.

As an interested bystander it's peculiar to read the complaints on the new cars being under factored on one hand, and in the same breath these people are trying to hide their car's true performance. (1.5+ seconds under their index)

The way I see it, if everyone said screw it and ran their cars to the full potential, other than possible ladder differences (and being refactored over time) you would all be in the same boat as you are now, other than only being able to brag about running a half second or full second under their index as upposed to 1.5+. Where is the glory in having the performance but not showing it? If anything, a racer who triggers ahfs ET should be congratulated for his efforts, plus it forces others in his class to work harder, isn't that what class racing is all about after all?

If NHRA truely wanted to see the potential of every class car, they could eliminate break outs, and go off the index like the Comp racers. That would be some awesome racing to watch!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^
Right on Nice Post

[Adger Smith]

There needs to be some provision for one or two car classes to keep them from killing a class. The setting of records should be exempt from AHFS. Aren't records supposed to be the fastest and best of the class. How is that going to happen with this new AHFS?
It sure is going to put a halt to what remains of all out class elemination runs, too. TD and TS are looking better. At least they have all out qualifying.

[Bill Edgeworth]

Wade,
You can hide from the performance ****s with me…. In super stock.

Not only are they killing the performance aspect of the sport. The proposed system along with the new weight limits changes things for a lot of people. I won’t even be able to run in K because of the upper weight limit. It’s a head on attack on fast cars old or new. Maybe they didn’t like seeing a PT cruiser spank all the new factory cars at Indy.
Here is a question for the legal buffs; with the new maximum weight rule a 170# driver can drive my car in K but a whale like me cannot run the car in K. Discrimination based upon physical attributes?

[GTX JOHN]

About the 340 Mopars......Then 340 Combo I currently run (E/F/G) in the A body Mopar moved to 293 HP in 2010...prior to that 289 for some years prior to that 285 for quite a while. It has been as low as 265 in the time I have been around that combo in NHRA. The same combo has been factored all the way to 299 in the E body. This is the low compression/smaller valve Version.

[thomas sheehan]

random thoughts (after reading everyone's rants)

1. Many are complaining that "no one can (or should want to) go faster than -.99 under the index..... That's the same threshold we had this year (two hits of -1.00 got you reviewed).

2. Every hp review system NHRA has ever used always penalized the fastest combos in stock and SS. Wether it's the current AFHS, or the old system where NHRA would just give you hp because you are too fast, the fastest combos always got hit (most of them). - SO if you can go -1.20 under todays index.... do you think you don't need hp???

3. We all agree the dp and cjs are soft.... but so are alot of other combos.

I got more.... but... I gotta eat breakfast