2011 ahfs

[Mike Carr]

Yes, it has to average -.850 or more to receive a hit.

"To more clearly illustrate how the AHFS program affects a given combination, the following is a hypothetical evaluation in Stock class for a 305-cubic-inch, 215 factory rated horsepower, fuel-injected Camaro during a review period:

Two K/SA Camaros running this combination ran 1.214- and 1.187- second under the index, triggering a review. As per the procedure outlined above, the overall engine average is analyzed first. Upon reviewing the engine average made by the 305/215/241 FI combination, 10 runs had been recorded (2 in K/SA and 8 in L/SA) with a total engine average of .845-second under. Because the overall engine average did not hit the required 0.850 under, the combination did not warrant a horsepower adjustment based on overall engine average.

The next step, per the procedure outlined above, is a class/engine review. The class of the car that actually triggered the review was K/SA. The class review revealed that K/SA had a class/engine average for the combination in question of 1.201-second under, therefore surpassing the 0.850-second-under requirement and signaling a horsepower adjustment for all 305/215/241 FI Camaros."

So just because a combination is "flagged" for review, does not mean it will actually receive horsepower.

[Eric Merryfield]

What about the reduction? What did you get for the answer to the example listed? Is it me or is it a bit off?

Thanks

Eric

[Ed Wright]

Thanks Mike, that is how I understood it.

[Travis Miller]

Originally Posted by Adger Smith

Travis,
Quote:But is it right for a car that is not factored correctly to set the record representing a class?

If he is best of class and has worked hard to be fast, why not? Not all fast cars are improperly factored. Some get fast from hard work, testing and having the right suspension setup. Your answer assumes a fast car doesn't have the right factor.

The AHFS is not out to get guys who work hard to be fast. They just happen to be caught up in the process. The AHFS is after combinations that for whatever reason have snuck in under the radar and are capable of running so fast it drastically effects all of Stock and S/S.

In the old days long before the AHFS was introduced, a combination that ran too quick was refactored by an individual in power. Later a committee took over the responsibility. These were pretty good systems but in rare cases human nature would allow personal factors to sneak in and effect the outcome. That is why the AHFS came into play.

As long as heads up runs and class eliminations at some events are a part of these eliminators, there has to be a way to control runaway combinations. Unfortunately those who seek to prove they can squeeze every ounce of power out of a correctly factored combo and go faster than their peers, then they will be penalized for their hard work. Stock and S/S may be performance based but for the masses it has to be controlled performance. Otherwise it would become an ever shrinking game where very few will eventually be able to play.

With all the issues (and sometimes dilemmas) that Stock and S/S present to sanctioning bodies, if it were not for the huge number of participants these eliminators continue to produce, they would probably have been gone long ago. Maybe it's time for a few individuals to quit trying to change every aspect of Stock and S/S to suit their own agendas and let the masses (read as the silent majority) continue to race.

Travis Miller

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

[BlueOval Ralph]

YOU do know what a Camel is??? It's a horse designed by committee!!!

Originally Posted by Travis Miller

The AHFS is not out to get guys who work hard to be fast. They just happen to be caught up in the process. The AHFS is after combinations that for whatever reason have snuck in under the radar and are capable of running so fast it drastically effects all of Stock and S/S.

In the old days long before the AHFS was introduced, a combination that ran too quick was refactored by an individual in power. Later a committee took over the responsibility. These were pretty good systems but in rare cases human nature would allow personal factors to sneak in and effect the outcome. That is why the AHFS came into play.

As long as heads up runs and class eliminations at some events are a part of these eliminators, there has to be a way to control runaway combinations. Unfortunately those who seek to prove they can squeeze every ounce of power out of a correctly factored combo and go faster than their peers, then they will be penalized for their hard work. Stock and S/S may be performance based but for the masses it has to be controlled performance. Otherwise it would become an ever shrinking game where very few will eventually be able to play.

With all the issues (and sometimes dilemmas) that Stock and S/S present to sanctioning bodies, if it were not for the huge number of participants these eliminators continue to produce, they would probably have been gone long ago. Maybe it's time for a few individuals to quit trying to change every aspect of Stock and S/S to suit their own agendas and let the masses (read as the silent majority) continue to race.

Travis Miller

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

[Jeff Teuton]

I guess any valve spring, any valve job, etc, etc,etc,etc,etc,ported heads,etc, any brakes, any etc that enhance performance makes Stock and SS very dynamic eliminators, combined with static numbers, AHFS, makes for a math guys nightmare. It's kinda like taking a really good pie and moving it off the counter and onto a short table, and then getting mad at my dog Lucky for eating the pie that he couldn't reach before. But if you leave the pie on the counter, and Lucky, being the smart Beagle he is works out , looses weight, and developes the ability to jump on the counter, should you still be mad if he gets the pie. Now you know how the AHFS works. But then I am probably not wise enough to discuss this thing anyway.

[Chad Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Jeff Teuton

I guess any valve spring, any valve job, etc, etc,etc,etc,etc,ported heads,etc, any brakes, any etc that enhance performance makes Stock and SS very dynamic eliminators, combined with static numbers, AHFS, makes for a math guys nightmare. It's kinda like taking a really good pie and moving it off the counter and onto a short table, and then getting mad at my dog Lucky for eating the pie that he couldn't reach before. But if you leave the pie on the counter, and Lucky, being the smart Beagle he is works out , looses weight, and developes the ability to jump on the counter, should you still be mad if he gets the pie. Now you know how the AHFS works. But then I am probably not wise enough to discuss this thing anyway.

Jeff, that's hilarious..................so how many times have you told your wife "honey, the dog ate the pie...............i swear"

[Jeff Teuton]

I guess the only other thing is 'Do I beat Lucky?' for eating the pie, or give him a much loved ear scratching for working so hard. I guess the answer is 1.20 under or .850 under average for all his jumps. And nobody including me ever beats Lucky. You gotta admit it's pretty close. Of course Travis the Tech Guy will have to see what kind of pie it was, what size was the plate, just how much did Lucky eat, homeade or store bought. I just couldn't pass that Travis.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Jeff Teuton

Of course Travis the Tech Guy will have to see what kind of pie it was, what size was the plate, just how much did Lucky eat, homeade or store bought. I just couldn't pass that Travis.

See, that's where you screwed up. At Bowling Green, you should have had Travis at your trailer feeding him, but you had us and the Hills down there instead, and left Travis and Redman out.

[Craig Couris]

Does anyone else have an opinion on the AA/SA index of 10.60?