Where are the lower class cars?

[Dwight Southerland]

Some things to consider about the "harder to win with a slower car" and "more sensitive to . . . " observations: First, in this era of technology (weather stations, ET predicting software, etc.), there is the possibility of better tools to help with the dialing of those cars. It may be that the current products have some built in limitations that make them not as applicable as they could be, but the possibility for more accurate analysis is available. Secondly, there are a gazillion late model high-tech small engined cars out there that aren't in the classification guide. Now NHRA is not going to voluntarily put out the effort to get them listed, but somebody could do all the legwork. Granted most are FWD, but NHRA could also respond to increased participation with expanding the coverage of those classes again. The fields are ripe for a new definition of "Jr Stock". Considering the potential of some of those combinations, the ability to have a car with little modification that would be competitive is certainly possible. Thirdly, if half the effort had been put into the accumulation of knowledge and technique of racing slower, mostly environment-sensitive cars as has been put into racing big power cars, the ability to step into a competitive and winning slower car would be easier and more attractive. That can be overcome and is a mission for somebody.

Another nickel on the soapbox.

[Bob Bender]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Some things to consider about the "harder to win with a slower car" and "more sensitive to . . . " observations: First, in this era of technology (weather stations, ET predicting software, etc.), there is the possibility of better tools to help with the dialing of those cars. It may be that the current products have some built in limitations that make them not as applicable as they could be, but the possibility for more accurate analysis is available. Secondly, there are a gazillion late model high-tech small engined cars out there that aren't in the classification guide. Now NHRA is not going to voluntarily put out the effort to get them listed, but somebody could do all the legwork. Granted most are FWD, but NHRA could also respond to increased participation with expanding the coverage of those classes again. The fields are ripe for a new definition of "Jr Stock". Considering the potential of some of those combinations, the ability to have a car with little modification that would be competitive is certainly possible. Thirdly, if half the effort had been put into the accumulation of knowledge and technique of racing slower, mostly environment-sensitive cars as has been put into racing big power cars, the ability to step into a competitive and winning slower car would be easier and more attractive. That can be overcome and is a mission for somebody.

Another nickel on the soapbox.

100% Correct ..... look at me at E-Town...picked up.09 from somwhere(think the wind laid down a lot on the run)

[GarysZ24]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Some things to consider about the "harder to win with a slower car" and "more sensitive to . . . " observations: First, in this era of technology (weather stations, ET predicting software, etc.), there is the possibility of better tools to help with the dialing of those cars. It may be that the current products have some built in limitations that make them not as applicable as they could be, but the possibility for more accurate analysis is available. Secondly, there are a gazillion late model high-tech small engined cars out there that aren't in the classification guide. Now NHRA is not going to voluntarily put out the effort to get them listed, but somebody could do all the legwork. Granted most are FWD, but NHRA could also respond to increased participation with expanding the coverage of those classes again. The fields are ripe for a new definition of "Jr Stock". Considering the potential of some of those combinations, the ability to have a car with little modification that would be competitive is certainly possible. Thirdly, if half the effort had been put into the accumulation of knowledge and technique of racing slower, mostly environment-sensitive cars as has been put into racing big power cars, the ability to step into a competitive and winning slower car would be easier and more attractive. That can be overcome and is a mission for somebody.

Another nickel on the soapbox.

Again well said Dwight, the way I see it, if Jody Lang can do it, then anybody can do it, as long as they're willing & able to apply theirselves to what they're racing like he has for so many years...Jody's winning to day (even in spite of the DP's and the CJ's), with the same Malibu wagon he won the '98 & '99 Mopar Mile High's with. Every time Jody wins (especially against those cars that are 3sec.'s quicker than his), then I know that I can do it too, so I know it can be done...other fwd and slower roller racers have one numerous elimination heats against the faster cars as well, so as far as I'm concerned the equipment is here. Although NHRA has allowed the faster cars things to help make them faster like wheelie bars, and different valves/springs, and other engine components that weren't legal in Stock 30yrs ago, they haven't been so liberal with the fwd cars (like giving FI cars like mine an option to replace their factory systems, with earlier production carbureted induction systems, to possibly improve their cars ability to be more competitive w/o the expensive FI systems). Why not NHRA? You guys want to know why I've been so much of an advocate of IHRA this year, that's one of the biggest reasons why...they make it easier for the faster cars to be even faster, but they haven't offered options to us slower roller (and especially fwd) racers to help make our cars quicker and more competitive too...what's fair about that???

Dwight, I could only hope that racers interested in some newer (against the norm combos), will get their oem stats and send them to NHRA just like I did, because prior to my desire to get my car to be a stocker, it wasn't in the classification guide either. The Late Great Founder of NHRA "Wally Parks", was the proponent of fwd racing in Stock Eliminator. He's sadly gone, and it's beginning to show with how the fwd & all class racers are being treated...NHRA didn't need to go to such extremes with class consolidation, but carbureted racers are paying for it when racing FI cars, and fwd's didn't need to go from 16, down to 5...8 would've been a sacrifice too, but it would've made more sense!

To whoever (in another thread earlier this year) said NHRA reads these posts, I hope you're right, because I want them to know how I feel about their apparent lack of caring for us sportsman class racers who want to compete at the national/divisional events they offer, but every year it seems that they're showing that they don't give a damn about us...adding these new sportsman classes (that aren't rules restricted), raising our competition costs, not talking to ESPN about getting shows like "Inside Drag Racing" back (thus allowing our cars to be seen again like they used to be 5yrs ago), yet claiming to support sportsman racing...words are one thing, but actions are something else, and those actions aren't very supportive IMHO!!!

Finally, if NHRA really cares about us sportsman racers, then they should reduce our competiton costs...our purse sizes (with contingencies included), are down so the entry fees, and registration costs should be down too...especially until America gets back to work again...that sounds fair to me!

My .02 x's 2!

[Jack Matyas]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

Two easy examples: The elimination of deep staging and the consolidation of FWD classes.

(Unrelated) Do you still have your Ventura?

Michael - You became a World Champion without deep staging so is it needed ? And the FWD class elimination was because there were just too many classes - don't you agree ?

As for my Ventura - I sold it at a time when I just owned too many cars and my health was in the toilet .A stupid move on my part - sure wish I had it back ....................

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by Jack Matyas

Michael - You became a World Champion without deep staging so is it needed ?

...with a low 11-sec crate motor car each time, neither of which qualifies as a lower class car. We've spent a great deal of time on the phone discussing reaction times, even in regards to a fast car like yours. How many people do you think could hit the tree, both good and consistent, in a lower classed car without deep staging? There aren't too many people out there wired like Billy Nees (insert your own joke here).

The elimination of deep staging wasn't a stroke of the pen that eliminated slow cars and instituted factory race cars overnight. It was a nudge that was just one contribution to a chain of events, in my opinion. It wasn't long after deep staging was eliminated that you started to see a number of drivers move from lower class cars to faster cars. (always exceptions of course, like Lang) Not saying it's right or wrong, but it seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy: The more people that chose to run fast cars, the more people felt like they needed fast cars to compete. Obviously, each individual has their own reasons for building a given car, but it seems that the many people are led to the same conclusion. There has been a definite change in the general makeup of the field since I started racing.

And the FWD class elimination was because there were just too many classes - don't you agree ?

Yes and no. I think there are too many classes as a whole, but that's another discussion that has already been debated and is currently dead on arrival. Both then and now, there are reasonable ways to handle consolidation of classes. Going from 16 classes to 5 (and the way in which it was implemented) was overkill. The irony is that many people feel it was ok for the FWD cars, but it's fought against strongly when the same idea is applied to other cars. There was a decent number of FWD cars out there when I got started. Where are they now? Is it reasonable for a car to be 225# heavy for one class and 400# light for the next? Is it reasonable for a car that could run -1.000 under the old format now run -.30 under? Would either of these examples be tolerated for a B/SA combination?

Was there a downside to "too many" FWD classes before outside of Class singles? While it is after the fact, today's Class Eliminations structure eliminates that issue. What would the effect of a more reasonable class structure be today? Does it help or hurt the sport or class? 'Who cares about FWD cars anyway? It's just a couple of cars.' A couple of cars here and a couple of cars there, gone (for a multitude of different reason), and you wonder why we have discussions about car counts...

The horse may have already left the barn. The level of competition today and the cumulative years of strategic knowledge (two things intertwined) are ultimately going to lead the majority of people to build faster cars. Does it help or hurt the sport when the Billy Nees's of the sport are gone? The only thing driving cars back down into lower (more like mid-range) classes right now, in my opinion, is the prospect of numerous heads-up runs in the growing ranks of the upper classes.

$.02,

[GarysZ24]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

...with a low 11-sec crate motor car each time, neither of which qualifies as a lower class car. We've spent a great deal of time on the phone discussing reaction times, even in regards to a fast car like yours. How many people do you think could hit the tree, both good and consistent, in a lower classed car without deep staging? There aren't too many people out there wired like Billy Nees (insert your own joke here).

The elimination of deep staging wasn't a stroke of the pen that eliminated slow cars and instituted factory race cars overnight. It was a nudge that was just one contribution to a chain of events, in my opinion. It wasn't long after deep staging was eliminated that you started to see a number of drivers move from lower class cars to faster cars. (always exceptions of course, like Lang) Not saying it's right or wrong, but it seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy: The more people that chose to run fast cars, the more people felt like they needed fast cars to compete. Obviously, each individual has their own reasons for building a given car, but it seems that the many people are led to the same conclusion. There has been a definite change in the general makeup of the field since I started racing.



Yes and no. I think there are too many classes as a whole, but that's another discussion that has already been debated and is currently dead on arrival. Both then and now, there are reasonable ways to handle consolidation of classes. Going from 16 classes to 5 (and the way in which it was implemented) was overkill. The irony is that many people feel it was ok for the FWD cars, but it's fought against strongly when the same idea is applied to other cars. There was a decent number of FWD cars out there when I got started. Where are they now? Is it reasonable for a car to be 225# heavy for one class and 400# light for the next? Is it reasonable for a car that could run -1.000 under the old format now run -.30 under? Would either of these examples be tolerated for a B/SA combination?

Was there a downside to "too many" FWD classes before outside of Class singles? While it is after the fact, today's Class Eliminations structure eliminates that issue. What would the effect of a more reasonable class structure be today? Does it help or hurt the sport or class? 'Who cares about FWD cars anyway? It's just a couple of cars.' A couple of cars here and a couple of cars there, gone (for a multitude of different reason), and you wonder why we have discussions about car counts...

The horse may have already left the barn. The level of competition today and the cumulative years of strategic knowledge (two things intertwined) are ultimately going to lead the majority of people to build faster cars. Does it help or hurt the sport when the Billy Nees's of the sport are gone? The only thing driving cars back down into lower (more like mid-range) classes right now, in my opinion, is the prospect of numerous heads-up runs in the growing ranks of the upper classes.

$.02,

I couldn't agree more Michael!

[GarysZ24]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

Two easy examples: The elimination of deep staging and the consolidation of FWD classes.

(Unrelated) Do you still have your Ventura?

Now, Michael, I have to agree with you here...thank GOD for IHRA, although I never was good at the deep staging part.