Decisions from NHRA on Proposals

[340Cuda]

Ed,

I was pleased that your proposals received the attention and serious consideration that they deserved.

I think a lot of that was because of the professional way you presented your ideas.

Thanks!
Bill Lamb

[Chuck Norton]

Essentially, cartoonist Walt Kelly (Pogo) was correct in his description of this and many other similar outcomes as long ago as 1970.

"We have met the enemy and he is us!"

Rock on!!

c

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by Chuck Norton

Essentially, cartoonist Walt Kelly (Pogo) was correct in his description of this and many other similar outcomes as long ago as 1970.

"We have met the enemy and he is us!"

Rock on!!

c

You nailed it Chuck !

[Steve Sullivan]

"Racers don’t want to deal with getting torn down – It is not a big deal for us to tear down cars making runs (we do it at the National Opens I just mentioned), but racers are not as apt to want their cars torn down as in the past. This is particularly true of many of the newer combinations."

Well NO ****!!! When have racers ever WANTED to be torn down. Why should we continue to acquiesce to the people with "newer combinations" who with a few exceptions probably couldn't tear their stuff down themselves if their life depended on it. Go race TS, SG, SC, or SST (with all due respect to these racers) if you don't want to prove the legality of your car. Some of us rather enjoy getting our hands dirty in our jeans and T-Shirts rather than entertaining our buddies with craft beer dressed in designer apparel.

I'm sick and tired of S/SS being administrated on the basis of "customer surveys" where only privilege or fame gets you input. It would appear the "well heeled" or "well connected" are the sole arbiters of what NHRA does or doesn't do in S/SS. The rest of us can eat the mud we usually are parked in.

How much prestige is really left in qualifying if, say for the U.S. Nationals, many of the "qualifiers" could be as illegal as the day is long because they can get away with it with impunity. Not very much! If I were among the first "non qualifiers" with a legal entry I'd wonder how many bogus ones got in with out even a chance of being caught. Class Winners should be the FIRST priority of who gets in the show. Period! These are PERFORMANCE Classes. Reward Class PERFORMANCE 1st! If someone has a V/SA that runs -.60 under to defeat another V/SA they should be in the Show. Not some Country Club racer who buys his way in with a soft indexed "newer combination" that can't win Class but goes just fast enough to bump out the V/SA Class Winner. Total BULL****!! AFTER the Class Winners it's the fastest qualifiers of non Class winners and prodigious random tear downs to insure a fair playing field. If there's better odds you'll get caught you might think twice about blatant cheating.

The SCRA is a bad joke as far as I'm concerned. Former reps have told me it's like pissing into the wind.
Things keep going the way they are S/SS will mean Shoe Polish/Super Shoe Polish.

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by 340Cuda

Ed,

I was pleased that your proposals received the attention and serious consideration that they deserved.

I think a lot of that was because of the professional way you presented your ideas.

Thanks!
Bill Lamb

^^ I agree with the above.

[Erik Jones]

As someone who built a business from the performance side of Stock and Super Stock i am very much for bringing that aspect back into what we do. I feel it has slowly slipped away. Please forgive me if this has already been touched one, but has anyone thought of talking with the SRAC before we talk to NHRA about this? They are the ones who should be fighting for what we want. I think it would be important to get them on board first and make sure we even have some sort of backing.

Just a thought.

[Ed Carpenter]

Originally Posted by Erik Jones

As someone who built a business from the performance side of Stock and Super Stock i am very much for bringing that aspect back into what we do. I feel it has slowly slipped away. Please forgive me if this has already been touched one, but has anyone thought of talking with the SRAC before we talk to NHRA about this? They are the ones who should be fighting for what we want. I think it would be important to get them on board first and make sure we even have some sort of backing.

Just a thought.

The information that has trickled in to me is that some of SRAC reps are the one who don't want any of it.

[SS3718]

Originally Posted by Ed Carpenter

The information that has trickled in to me is that some of SRAC reps are the one who don't want any of it.

Not throwing stones at all, but are the SRAC reps making decisions based on the voice of the RACER? I’m sure it is a difficult situation to be in and hard not to have some “self bias” mixed in!

I’m not even sure who the SRAC reps are? Are summaries of the discussions posted somewhere?

Nick