Where are the lower class cars? - Page 8

Stang_Bang · 06-23-2011, 01:36 AM

IMO, I think the reason you are seeing less and less of these cars is not because of index or entry fees, but because the slower cars are just really hard to win in. These cars are sensitive to wind, DA, humidity etc etc. Plus it is really hard to be consistent on the tree and drive the finish line while 90% of the field has 30+ mph on you! A national event is a big stage with great recognition when you win one, and if you are a competitor that is the goal every time you enter one!!! Racers now are utilizing the best tools to accomplish this feat, and according to statistics having that slow of a S/SS'er your chances of success are not very high. I'm not saying it is impossible, just being real. Stock/Super Stock isnt what it was 15 years ago thanks to $$$ and technology. No disrespect to anyone who has a slower class car, because I give you massive credit for doing it. How hard is it to judge a AA-D/SA in a 14 second car??? Very!!! I hope to see a front wheel win a national again, just so that driver can say he is one of only two people to win a national event in NHRA. I hope I didn't anger anyone, just wanted to share .02

GarysZ24 · 06-23-2011, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Matyas

Michael - Regulations ? I don't see it .My thoughts are they are dwindling because mostly they are grass roots racers who simply can't afford to keep up in these hard economic times .I just don't see the nudges .......

Frankly they are great for our sport - some fans love to root for the slow - lumbering cars - yet others like the big guns .Nothing better than to see an R/SA being chased by a 9 second late model or even an early Hemi or God forbid - a '69 Camaro .Doesn't matter which you want to win - it's always a great race ! ! !

x2 Jack, as I sure loved that even though the great Scotty Richardson won the Stock World Title in the NHRA (back in the mid-90's, he certainly didn't accomplish that at the expense of one Lane "The Hawk" Weber, and his 15-16sec Buick Skyhawk...that was a fun race to watch!!! WAY TO GO HAWK!!!

GarysZ24 · 06-23-2011, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stang_Bang

IMO, I think the reason you are seeing less and less of these cars is not because of index or entry fees, but because the slower cars are just really hard to win in. These cars are sensitive to wind, DA, humidity etc etc. Plus it is really hard to be consistent on the tree and drive the finish line while 90% of the field has 30+ mph on you! A national event is a big stage with great recognition when you win one, and if you are a competitor that is the goal every time you enter one!!! Racers now are utilizing the best tools to accomplish this feat, and according to statistics having that slow of a S/SS'er your chances of success are not very high. I'm not saying it is impossible, just being real. Stock/Super Stock isnt what it was 15 years ago thanks to $$$ and technology. No disrespect to anyone who has a slower class car, because I give you massive credit for doing it. How hard is it to judge a AA-D/SA in a 14 second car??? Very!!! I hope to see a front wheel win a national again, just so that driver can say he is one of only two people to win a national event in NHRA. I hope I didn't anger anyone, just wanted to share .02

True very true on all points Stang Bang, which is my motivation for being out there trying to accomplish what will be a monumental feat (when it happens)! I used to be good at racing cars that ran 10-14sec. (when my cars ran 18-22sec.), and I will be that way again (with more seat time, via bracket/class racing)....I mainly need to be a driver more like Jody Lang, but with my car. Somebodies going to do it, and I hope that somebody's me!

No anger here, just more reason to be motivated to get my butt out to the track to do more racing, because 85% + of all of the races I lost were because of poor decision making on my part, or my subpar driving...not the car!

GarysZ24 · 06-23-2011, 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack McCarthy

i second that :"atta boy"

just not the same anymore, all about money not talent
class wins and records mean absolutely nothing anymore

jack

and why would i want to go to that god forsaken, slow ***, billy goat mountainside track ?

x2 on your class win comments Jack (especially since the class win contingency postings I can claim have essentially diminished), and thanks to NHRA's index enhancements, I'm no longer able to run .5 or more under the index.

Dwight, I'll give you kudos for your remarks too, but I have greater motivation than even you mentioned:

It will give me great satisfaction to see a car line (the Chevy Cavalier) that was unjustly belittled by Consumer Reports (as were all American small cars), plus Car & Driver magazines, doing something that their more beloved Honda Civics, Acura Integra's, and other imports of their ilk have yet to even try! My car was built by the great people of Janesville, Wisconsin...people like all of you reading this. I believe in you guys/gals, and when I see all of these imports around me, when millions of Americans are unemployed because of "MADE IN THE USA" not seeming to matter on our roads/highways like it used to, not only am I glad to see the DP's and the CJ's being out here and quickly competitive (again kudos to Les Norton, for his SLC Nitro Jam win last week!), but I like it even more when fwd cars like mine, Charles Blossom's, Randy Hyman's, Michael Beard's, and all others who (for whatever reason) still race their fwd vehicles. For that matter, I root for anyone who's continuing to race a 14sec or slower stocker, because the challenges may be greater, but the satisfaction of accomplishing something that few have dared to try is greater too...kind of like the US MARINES...The Few, The Proud, The Slower Roller Dragracers!

Dwight Southerland · 06-23-2011, 09:02 AM

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 · 06-23-2011, 09:40 AM

Quote:

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)

Danny Ashley · 06-23-2011, 01:29 PM

Looking at first round of Stock qualifying at Norwalk, 85% were G and faster.

Michael Beard · 06-23-2011, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Ashley

Looking at first round of Stock qualifying at Norwalk, 85% were G and faster.

And realistically, only 3 cars 12-sec and slower. (Veach and Pires will obviously go faster)

goinbroke2 · 06-24-2011, 06:51 AM

I think, in a nut shell that the upper classes are filled with people who can afford it. The middle by people who are doing what they can to be as fast as they can. The lower classes by low buck or entry level people. I realise this is a generalisation, but in most cases it fits.
That being said, I really enjoy slower/oddball/different combo's, moreso than the A-E/S.
I enjoy watching the big wheelstands from the older ponycars/musclecars, but other than that my heart is with the R or T and down Stockers.

So why is there less slower cars? Sure they might be less competetive or less likely to win, but that has always been the case. Less performance parts? Sure but again that's not new. So what is it? I would say the upper classes can still afford it, period. The middle classes are running less but can still scrape by with less update/upgrades. The lower classes, who could only scrape together the bucks to run when they can with what they can, just can't afford it in these times.
Any "enhancement" that cost $$$ can be absorbed by the big bucks guys (who coincidentily are running upper classes) but ask a lower class guy? Then it's "man I have to find another $1000 somewhere so I'll be legal again".

Maybe I'm just cheap, but I love the underdogs/lower classes.
(Was digging around in some old boxes of mags recently and found the Stock/Superstock mag with Steve Polhills interview with the Escort, excellent!)

(Oh and for the record, yes I'm tired of seeing 69 camaro's.) LOL

Dwight Southerland · 06-24-2011, 06:33 PM

Here is another observation. When you consider the cost of building a full high tech car, there is little difference in the cost of building a 4-bbl V8 of any variety. What I mean is, if you are building a small block Chevy, for example, there is little difference to build a 305 smogger as it is to build a top of the line high performance version. The cost of the pistons, rods, valve train, heads, machine work, suspension, roll bar/cage, transmission, accessories, trick parts, etc. etc. is the same for the 305 that runs high elevens as it is for a ten second combination. The same for about any manufacturer. So why spend all that time and money on a mid to high eleven second car when you can go tens for the same $$? The are anomalies to those characteristics, but I would dare say that Wade Owens' 283 M/SA cost just as much as a competitive C or D car. It's not until you get away from some of the basic standard 4-bbl V8 costs that things change dramatically. Now I know that an FE Ford or a Hemi costs more than a small block Chevy, but as a rule you will have some basic core costs that are the same. That is a major reason why more faster cars are built.

06-23-2011, 01:36 AM	#71
Stang_Bang Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 30 Likes: 1 Liked 2 Times in 1 Post	Re: Where are the lower class cars? IMO, I think the reason you are seeing less and less of these cars is not because of index or entry fees, but because the slower cars are just really hard to win in. These cars are sensitive to wind, DA, humidity etc etc. Plus it is really hard to be consistent on the tree and drive the finish line while 90% of the field has 30+ mph on you! A national event is a big stage with great recognition when you win one, and if you are a competitor that is the goal every time you enter one!!! Racers now are utilizing the best tools to accomplish this feat, and according to statistics having that slow of a S/SS'er your chances of success are not very high. I'm not saying it is impossible, just being real. Stock/Super Stock isnt what it was 15 years ago thanks to $$$ and technology. No disrespect to anyone who has a slower class car, because I give you massive credit for doing it. How hard is it to judge a AA-D/SA in a 14 second car??? Very!!! I hope to see a front wheel win a national again, just so that driver can say he is one of only two people to win a national event in NHRA. I hope I didn't anger anyone, just wanted to share .02

06-23-2011, 09:02 AM	#75
Dwight Southerland VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything. Posts: 1,999 Likes: 64 Liked 772 Times in 192 Posts	Re: Where are the lower class cars? 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. Last edited by Dwight Southerland; 06-23-2011 at 09:07 AM. Reason: overcoming failures between brain and fingers

06-23-2011, 01:29 PM	#77
Danny Ashley Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Marion,In. Posts: 267 Likes: 60 Liked 110 Times in 29 Posts	Re: Where are the lower class cars? Looking at first round of Stock qualifying at Norwalk, 85% were G and faster.

06-24-2011, 06:51 AM	#79
goinbroke2 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: NS CANADA Posts: 884 Likes: 1,564 Liked 381 Times in 148 Posts	Re: Where are the lower class cars? I think, in a nut shell that the upper classes are filled with people who can afford it. The middle by people who are doing what they can to be as fast as they can. The lower classes by low buck or entry level people. I realise this is a generalisation, but in most cases it fits. That being said, I really enjoy slower/oddball/different combo's, moreso than the A-E/S. I enjoy watching the big wheelstands from the older ponycars/musclecars, but other than that my heart is with the R or T and down Stockers. So why is there less slower cars? Sure they might be less competetive or less likely to win, but that has always been the case. Less performance parts? Sure but again that's not new. So what is it? I would say the upper classes can still afford it, period. The middle classes are running less but can still scrape by with less update/upgrades. The lower classes, who could only scrape together the bucks to run when they can with what they can, just can't afford it in these times. Any "enhancement" that cost $$$ can be absorbed by the big bucks guys (who coincidentily are running upper classes) but ask a lower class guy? Then it's "man I have to find another $1000 somewhere so I'll be legal again". Maybe I'm just cheap, but I love the underdogs/lower classes. (Was digging around in some old boxes of mags recently and found the Stock/Superstock mag with Steve Polhills interview with the Escort, excellent!) (Oh and for the record, yes I'm tired of seeing 69 camaro's.) LOL

06-24-2011, 06:33 PM	#80
Dwight Southerland VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything. Posts: 1,999 Likes: 64 Liked 772 Times in 192 Posts	Re: Where are the lower class cars? Here is another observation. When you consider the cost of building a full high tech car, there is little difference in the cost of building a 4-bbl V8 of any variety. What I mean is, if you are building a small block Chevy, for example, there is little difference to build a 305 smogger as it is to build a top of the line high performance version. The cost of the pistons, rods, valve train, heads, machine work, suspension, roll bar/cage, transmission, accessories, trick parts, etc. etc. is the same for the 305 that runs high elevens as it is for a ten second combination. The same for about any manufacturer. So why spend all that time and money on a mid to high eleven second car when you can go tens for the same $$? The are anomalies to those characteristics, but I would dare say that Wade Owens' 283 M/SA cost just as much as a competitive C or D car. It's not until you get away from some of the basic standard 4-bbl V8 costs that things change dramatically. Now I know that an FE Ford or a Hemi costs more than a small block Chevy, but as a rule you will have some basic core costs that are the same. That is a major reason why more faster cars are built.