2011 ahfs

[Bryan Worner]

It's not hard to figure out that when the trigger was 1.15 under the old indexes at national events the MOST of the racers were slowing their cars down! The way it was last year, with .3 taken off and 1 second under being the trigger (1.30 under the old indexes) that most were running all out or close to all out.

[Jim Bailey]

Joe: the new 2011 AHFS includes all those races. Div 3 SRAC Rep. JB.

[Travis Miller]

I verified this morning that altitude runs shown for 2010 in the total number of Stock and S/S data posted on this forum were NOT refactored back to sea level. The total run data was posted simply to show how many runs were made overall in 2010 for Stock and S/S. Looks like the committee only saw the total run data, which of course was not refactored to sea level.

That means all runs of 1.00, 1.05, 1.10, 1.15, and 1.20 under at an altitude track is included without being refactored. Those runs at altitude tracks cannot be included when talking about the total number of runs of 1.10 under the index. It also excludes altitude runs when talking about how many runs were made by new vs old cars. There were many runs made by old cars of 1.10 under at altitude tracks and are not refactored to sea level.

I therefore stand by my original numbers showing real runs of 1.10 or more under the index and which group (new vs old cars) made those runs.

OF SPECIAL NOTE......I do want to make it very clear in this post that data that went into the actual AHFS for 2010 from altitude tracks concerning any horsepower change WAS correctly refactored to sea level.

Travis Miller

(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed by me on this forum are exactly that, my opinions.)

[Ed Wright]

Thanks Travis.

[Mickey Whaley]

man those 2 just got tangled up?

[Bryan Worner]

Originally Posted by Mickey Whaley

man those 2 just got tangled up?

Who was that Mick???

[Kent Hanley]

Originally Posted by Travis Miller

I verified this morning that altitude runs shown for 2010 in the total number of Stock and S/S data posted on this forum were NOT refactored back to sea level. The total run data was posted simply to show how many runs were made overall in 2010 for Stock and S/S. Looks like the committee only saw the total run data, which of course was not refactored to sea level.

That means all runs of 1.00, 1.05, 1.10, 1.15, and 1.20 under at an altitude track is included without being refactored. Those runs at altitude tracks cannot be included when talking about the total number of runs of 1.10 under the index. It also excludes altitude runs when talking about how many runs were made by new vs old cars. There were many runs made by old cars of 1.10 under at altitude tracks and are not refactored to sea level.

I therefore stand by my original numbers showing real runs of 1.10 or more under the index and which group (new vs old cars) made those runs.

OF SPECIAL NOTE......I do want to make it very clear in this post that data that went into the actual AHFS for 2010 from altitude tracks concerning any horsepower change WAS correctly refactored to sea level.

Travis Miller

(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed by me on this forum are exactly that, my opinions.)

Travis,

The way I understand the new ahfs is that they are not going to refactor the runs back to sea level index but apply the run against the local class index. I also understand NHRA is looking at the altitude adjustments on a track by track basis. So those numbers are the numbers and classes that would of been hit in 2010 if the 1.1 under cic rule were to be put in place.

Bryon, I agree, I think we all learned lots of people have been managing their combinations and will run just under what they have to save their combinations. Key word being "most".

Mike sorry if I put words in your mouth about saving any of your brothers or your fathers combinations.

Dave I missed that one that is why I made sure I said "think" since I wasn't sure what combo you guys run. I guess when I saw Gary's or Sorenson's impressive runs and how many other cars across the country that would of been hit by these one time weather conditions and these are just a couple of the old style combinations that would of been hit.

Jim, the new rule NHRA is looking at putting in doesn't include national opens just LRDS and National events , NHRA's original proposal included national opens.


Kent

[Adger Smith]

Kent,
Is that a change with National Opens?
I thought they counted now... I got hit .15 in SS/DS back in 2004 at the Montgomery National Open when I went 1.54 under.
I thought they are counting all Nat Open runs for the AHFS.
The AHFS is one reason I have stayed away from the No Problem races.
It would be nice to be able to keep runs at those Nat opens off AHFS. It might help car counts at them, too.

[Jeff Teuton]

Adger, the final is still being written. Used to be any run over 1.25 or 1.40 depending on the year were the only thing that counted at National Opens. I don't know if the runs over whatever the new trigger will be will get you hit in 2011. I don't think the runs under the big trigger have counted. I like that. From now on, the trigger for the initial 3.25 or larger hit will be known as "The Big Trigger".

[Chad Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Adger Smith

Kent,
Is that a change with National Opens?
I thought they counted now... I got hit .15 in SS/DS back in 2004 at the Montgomery National Open when I went 1.54 under.
I thought they are counting all Nat Open runs for the AHFS.
The AHFS is one reason I have stayed away from the No Problem races.
It would be nice to be able to keep runs at those Nat opens off AHFS. It might help car counts at them, too.

Adger, the No Problem race is a national event, not a national open. Therefore it would count the same as any other national, except for the CIC race