Consolidating Classes

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

I disagree. Some engines simply work much better with a stick than they do an automatic. Some engines work well either way. Considering the wide variation of bore/stroke ratios, rod/stroke ratios, carburetor sizes, and cylinder head CSA's, just to name a few factors, to say that all engines work equally well with sticks and automatics is simply a generalization that cannot be true, nor can it be supported.

Dosent matter....If it wont run with an automatic then put a stick in it. Most dont use the clutch anyway. The engine is just an air pump. In time with cam changes and tunning the ones that wont work well with an automatic will work. If its a small engine then allow a wt. break for the lower classes. How else ar ya going to get these new combos hit by the AHFS before we all die of old age? One lb breaks would help and being allowed to run the natural class only would go a long way in helping to bring back some sposors. The status que isnt working. So what is the answer?

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by X-TECH MAN

Dosent matter....If it wont run with an automatic then put a stick in it. Most dont use the clutch anyway. The engine is just an air pump. In time with cam changes and tunning the ones that wont work well with an automatic will work. If its a small engine then allow a wt. break for the lower classes. How else ar ya going to get these new combos hit by the AHFS before we all die of old age? One lb breaks would help and being allowed to run the natural class only would go a long way in helping to bring back some sposors. The status que isnt working. So what is the answer?

One pound weight breaks is entirely different from saying engines work the same regardless of the transmission. One pound weight breaks are fine, they're a good idea. Arbitrarily deciding to factor engines the same, regardless of the transmission is another thing entirely.

Cam changes will not change rod/stroke ratio, bore/stroke ratio, or other factors, and make them equal. It just simply won't work. You cannot, for example, make a 302 Ford work as well in front of a C4 as you can in front of a 4 speed. You cannot make that happen with a cam change.

And you cannot just go sticking additional weight breaks in for various combinations everywhere. Exactly how complex and convoluted do you want to make this? I thought the idea was to make fewer classes, fewer weight breaks, and more heads up races. Add 100 pounds for one engine, in one car, with a manual transmission, or take 100 pounds off of a different engine in a different car, with an automatic, just to try to make engines that don't work well with an automatic somewhat competitive? You cannot possibly be serious.

If it won't run with an automatic, put a stick in it? So, now it's okay to just pencil a guys combination dead? Excuse me, isn't that what we're trying to prevent?

And you're NEVER going to make the AHFS get all the new stuff in line. NEVER. They'll make however many new combinations every year they feel they need to. They never even have to build the cars or the engines, just sell the parts. If you think the new AHFS and changing weight breaks will stop that, well, you're going to be really disappointed.

[junior barns]

Originally Posted by X-TECH MAN

Dosent matter....If it wont run with an automatic then put a stick in it. Most dont use the clutch anyway. The engine is just an air pump. In time with cam changes and tunning the ones that wont work well with an automatic will work. If its a small engine then allow a wt. break for the lower classes. How else ar ya going to get these new combos hit by the AHFS before we all die of old age? One lb breaks would help and being allowed to run the natural class only would go a long way in helping to bring back some sposors. The status que isnt working. So what is the answer?

I like this idea!!!!!

[Alan Roehrich]

Here's a very quick rough draft:

AA 7.0 to 7.99 10.6
A 8.0 to 8.99 11.0
B 9.0 to 9.99 11.5
C 10.0 to 10.99 11.8
D 11.0 to 11.99 12.2
E 12.0 to 12.99 12.4
F 13.0 to 13.99 12.8
G 14.0 to 14.99 13.1
H 15.0 to 15.99 13.4
I 16.0 to 16.99 13.6
J 17.0 to 17.99 13.9
K 18.0 to 18.99 14.2
L 19.0 to 19.99 14.6
M 20.0 to 21.99 14.9
N 22.0 to 23.99 15.4
O 24.0 to 24.99 15.9
P 25.00 and higher 16.3


Automatic indexes would be 0.05 higher.


To merge the FWD cars, you'd use a weight offset to get them to a class where they're at a similar index. For example, the rule might read, " FWD cars run in a class 3.0 pounds heavier than their published factor". Instead of the wide weight breaks currently in FWD, you'd narrow them up.



For example, a A/FS FWD car that factors at 13.0 would be given a 3.0 offset, to make it a 16.0 factor. That would make it an I car with a 13.6 index, dropping their index 0.25 (almost all the indexes for the consolidated classes stay the same or get lower). You could either continue to run stick and auto together with a weight break, or separate them.

Counting separate classes for stick and automatic, you'd only have 32 classes, as opposed to the current number of around 45-50.

[Wayne Kerr]

Alan,
That is an excellent proposal, nicely done.
But while you are at it, can't you slide the letters up and eliminate AA?

See you at the races,
Wayne Kerr

[Dick Butler]

Always an interesting discussion. similar results. Many still satisfied as is...No interest in change even if it would be good for S and SS. I would be interested in WHY people care one way or the other. That would be enlightening.
Want no change, WHY? you still take the same car, still race bracket style 90% of races.
Still have same cars to race with class plus some more to make it more fun when allowed.
Answers?

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Dick Butler

Always an interesting discussion. similar results. Many still satisfied as is...No interest in change even if it would be good for S and SS. I would be interested in WHY people care one way or the other. That would be enlightening.
Want no change, WHY? you still take the same car, still race bracket style 90% of races.
Still have same cars to race with class plus some more to make it more fun when allowed.
Answers?

Answers? Half the people would not have to do anything and continue to have fun while the other half would have work to do which would limit their fun factor.

Consolidating classes would be fine for the people who are already on the full pound break. Example...A/SA, C/SA, E/SA, G/SA, etc. What about the people who are in B/SA, D/SA, F/SA, etc? There is a lot more to do than just adding or removing weight to fit a full pound break if you are looking at running heads up against already proven combinations in a class.

Maybe that is why there is not an overwelming interest in change even if those who are agenda driven THINK it would be good for S or SS. You want something good for S or SS. Try this agenda...LEAVE THE CLASSES ALONE.

PS> Looks like a majority in the poll kinda feel the same way. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahaha

[Billy Nees]

Alan, I suggested the same 3 lb. deal to Len (NHRA) when they combined and eliminated the FWD classes years ago. It didn't seem to matter to them that at the time I either was involved with or owned 6 FWD cars. I was just flat ignored!

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Wayne Kerr

Alan,
That is an excellent proposal, nicely done.
But while you are at it, can't you slide the letters up and eliminate AA?

See you at the races,
Wayne Kerr

Sure I could. I did that 2 years or so ago, in a hurry, to show how it could be done. I just pulled an old Word document I had saved of it and posted it.

Not that it makes any real difference, other than the fastest class being called "A" instead of "AA", and the slowest being called "Q" instead of "P".

There is however a serious problem with that old quick and dirty rough draft. It's brought on by the "new" cars. If you allow the new cars to run at 7.0, they'll likely be fast enough to pose a safety problem on a 9" tire. Yes, I know, there are a lot of "10.5 Outlaw" cars out there running real fast. The difference is, it is rare for them to have a race without a crash of some sort, where it's fairly rare to see cars in Stock crash. Also, the speeds would far exceed the current safety equipment standards for Stock (which are really set for a 9.90 or so ET at 130MPH). You just can't safely run 8.90 at 150 on 9" slicks, with stock seats, relatively stock suspension, and a cage that cannot even extend through the firewall.


A 7.0 to 7.99 10.7
B 8.0 to 8.99 11.0
C 9.0 to 9.99 11.5
D 10.0 to 10.99 11.8
E 11.0 to 11.99 12.2
F 12.0 to 12.99 12.4
G 13.0 to 13.99 12.8
H 14.0 to 14.99 13.1
I 15.0 to 15.99 13.4
J 16.0 to 16.99 13.6
K 17.0 to 17.99 13.9
L 18.0 to 18.99 14.2
M 19.0 to 19.99 14.6
N 20.0 to 21.99 14.9
O 22.0 to 23.99 15.4
P 24.0 to 24.99 15.9
Q 25.00 and higher 16.3

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Sure I could. I did that 2 years or so ago, in a hurry, to show how it could be done. I just pulled an old Word document I had saved of it and posted it.

Not that it makes any real difference, other than the fastest class being called "A" instead of "AA", and the slowest being called "Q" instead of "P".

There is however a serious problem with that old quick and dirty rough draft. It's brought on by the "new" cars. If you allow the new cars to run at 7.0, they'll likely be fast enough to pose a safety problem on a 9" tire. Yes, I know, there are a lot of "10.5 Outlaw" cars out there running real fast. The difference is, it is rare for them to have a race without a crash of some sort, where it's fairly rare to see cars in Stock crash. Also, the speeds would far exceed the current safety equipment standards for Stock (which are really set for a 9.90 or so ET at 130MPH). You just can't safely run 8.90 at 150 on 9" slicks, with stock seats, relatively stock suspension, and a cage that cannot even extend through the firewall.


A 7.0 to 7.99 10.7
B 8.0 to 8.99 11.0
C 9.0 to 9.99 11.5
D 10.0 to 10.99 11.8
E 11.0 to 11.99 12.2
F 12.0 to 12.99 12.4
G 13.0 to 13.99 12.8
H 14.0 to 14.99 13.1
I 15.0 to 15.99 13.4
J 16.0 to 16.99 13.6
K 17.0 to 17.99 13.9
L 18.0 to 18.99 14.2
M 19.0 to 19.99 14.6
N 20.0 to 21.99 14.9
O 22.0 to 23.99 15.4
P 24.0 to 24.99 15.9
Q 25.00 and higher 16.3

If thats the case then the new junk needs to be in S/S anyway.