Vegas SS Qualifying - WOW!

[Big Road]

jeff I did a little searching and the DA was 2000 feet better in indy than it was in vegas but shaul went the same at both tracks so what you are saying is shaul could have went an 04 at indy. Maybe he was sandbagging in the final for class at a 128 mph??????

[G Schenck]

Big Road, I mention Pro Stock because they always have their fresh new piece in where as a super stocker would have the same engine either two months older or just freshened. It's easier to compare apples to apples.

Greg

[Bryan Broaddus]

Big,

Some combinations are better at altitude than they are at sea level. You just can't take numbers from one track and apply them to another without more information. Pure speculation unless you have intimate information on the cars you are using as examples!

[Mike Carr]

The issue that concerns me more than the factor, is the HP issue. Why cars at altitude can not receive HP penalties. In 2002 at Denver, Gary Gokey drove his A/FS to a -1.562 at Denver, and received nothing (and has been further under than that in the past). Had I made a run at the Dutch Classic in '04 that fast in the Turbo 'Bird, I would have received a five HP hit. Instead, I had to run heavy and slow the car down, while he has free reign to go as fast as he wants with no repercussion. Just doesn't seem fair?

[Jeff Lee]

Vehicles can, and do, receive HP at altitude tracks. Again, you receive 1x freebie per each half of the race season. Don't know if that applied there or not. However, you should really be asking "why do turbo cars receive the same factors at altitude as non-turbo cars?" since the turbo introduces atmosphere into the equation. That doesn't seem fair, does it?

[Isaac Zane]

Jeff,

Name ONE racer that has received HP based on a run from an Alt. track? They can run -1.50+ which would still be more than -1.15 under the sea level index and still does not even get a look at. They don't even raise the one flag.

You don't get one freebie per half. We ran -1.18 ONCE at a Nat'l and got HP with a 73 Buick 350 Apollo. An earlier pre-smog 350 in a Skylark also went more than -1.15 at the same event was apparently enough to make a "Family" change. And the 71 version of this 350 is allowed a 800cfm quad and we aren't.. Where's the equality in that??

Also in the first half a 72 Camaro and a 78 Corvette each made a hit to make a family change. I wonder if the 78 is now allowed to use heads and intake from a 72 now?? I doubt it. Maybe the Camaro can mold a 78 Vette nose onto the front?????? I would love to use a 72 or older Buick 350 intake instead of the smog infested, spagetti tangled, 70 pound intake we currently use. And I would like to have the header room a Skylark has also. Let's get Bruce Noland started on this...... These "Family" hits are BS!!!

While I'm on a rant......
Why are Competition Eliminator CIC permenant hits now in use at alt. track and not AHFS???

I'd go have a drink, but I don't drink anything stronger than pop.......

but wait, pop used to drink anything!!!!


Until there's a better system............................................ ..

Safe Trips All!

[Bill Belden]

Right On Isaac, and what about some of the records set at altitude tracks, they wouldn't run those numbers at a sea level track.Yet when some records are set at a factored track it comes out to 1.40 under the sea level index and still no HP is given

[JRyan]

Isaac,

I'll not only name ONE, but TWO. One in Stock & one in SS. The Stocker was Neil Smedley, 2001, Vegas. The Superstocker was US with Kandra Weber driving, also at the 2001 Vegas Race.

But here's the catch. We can CHEAT the factor at Denver by changing the car to make it LEAVE, which changes the whole picture with regard to the factor. For instance. Kandra's Olds would run 1.15 under at Denver with the changes made for altitude. She just had the car back up there a month ago or so with just the sea level set-up in it and it went .80 under.

So at least from what I know about lower HP cars, you can make lots of changes to enhance altitude performance. Also, STICK cars can easily pick up 3 tenths by making changes at altitude to make them leave.

That being said, I would favor taking about 15 - 20 % off of everyones altitude factor. The reason is, the FAA when they adopted these factors, knew that pilots didn't have the option of making changes to their planes to let them get off of the ground faster. We do. Because of the options we have, the factors are currently a lilttle soft.

Jerry

[Isaac Zane]

OK, I'll have to rephrase my statement...

How about since AHFS came into play? Where it had at one time stated that NO Alt. adjusted tracks count towards AHFS. Ask Nitro Joe!

I have to thank Capt'n Jack on helping me remember the letters AHFS. (Automatic Help For Slugs)

Safe Trips All!

[Mark Yacavone]

Isaac, The AHFS was in place then. Afterwards, the "not at altitude" clause was added.
Guess what ? The rule correction was not made retroactive. No surprise there.