AA/S AAA/S and Class consolidation

[Bruce Noland]

Evan,

I pretty much agree with your post except for the AHFS.

The latest round of "adjustments" were totally bogus and should be withdrawn by nhra. The latest guy in charge of the AHFS has made dramatic changes in the system without telling any of the racers and we can only look for more abuse in the future; if we don't act now. I called Wesley and asked for his private email (apparently he has no nhra email) because I had some serious questions about what he had done to the system. He gave me his email address, and here it is four weeks later, and he has refused to respond to any of my questions. Not a surprise, however, we deserve better from an organization that wants to be a leader in the motor sports world. I'm still working on nhra to put the system back together; because it is surly broken.

The staff at nhra just can't seem to get it into their heads that they have responsibility to be, at the very least, professional in their approach to the rules. The AHFS has been abused by every nhra staff member who has exercised control over it. The racers helped to develop the AHFS and now we have some butchered version by Wesley et.al. The racers were never given advanced notification of these changes. This BS is going to stop! The racers must become involved in their own rule systems.

[RJ Sledge]

Bruce

What, in your opinion, needs to be done with the AHFS?? If you would "junk" it, what would you do to improve the HP situation?

I have heard a lot of bashing and complaining, and I have done it myself, but how about some solid and positive conversation on HOW to put together a system that will work.

NHRA needs some advice on how to improve what they have now, but it needs to be simple (KISS), so that it can be enforced by the Tech people. If its too complicated it won't work.

I agree with you that something needs to be done, just not sure what and how to do it.

RJ Sledge

[Bruce Noland]

R. J.

The first thing that must be done is to return the AHFS to the original version that we the racers designed in concert with nhra. You know, the HP system that was billed as the cure for meddling hands from nhra.

The second, make no changes to the AHFS until receiving feedback from the racers. As promised by Len Imbrogno.

The third, and the most important. No rules should be changed/enforced without advanced publication of the changes. Right now the system is currently an ambush device that changes without notice and is used to sabotage thousands of hours of work and thousands of dollars that have been invested by the racers. We all know that Danny Gracia is the MAN and he is the one who is ultimately responsible for the mess the AHFS has become. He allows these guys to mangle the system and then watches as nhra goes into it's hunker-down-teflon-mode when the complaints come pouring in.

Finally, serious criticism of a long festering problem at nhra is not bashing!

[Isaac Zane]

Glenn also has a A,B/SA Camaro that may be out again soon. I'm sure it will run with the big dogs!

[Dick Butler]

Bruce can you be more specific? how does the current AHFS vary from what you are generally describing and "the way it used to be"?
Better yet give one criteria which should be used? Altitude factoring? Air gauge/ Teardown first?
R Sledge is right. Give real examples...please

[Bruce Noland]

Geezz Dick,

Wake up!

Just look it up for yourself. The orginal AHFS is still on the nhra site. There is a very simple one paragraph description of how we set up the system.

Now Wesley and others have created this after-the-fact monster of a system that basicly says they can do what ever the hell they please and without telling one racer about the changes before they implement them.

The AHFS that we voted for was a combination specific system. The system that Wesley has created says he no longer needs similar combinations to get a triggering event. He has also combined huge numbers of cars that were never even considered to be similar by the original AHFS - like Chev, Olds, Buick, and Pontiac.

Your question shows that you have not been paying attention. This problem has nothing to do with teardowns or any number of side show issues. But, it has everything to do with the design and administration of the rules and how Wesley and others have cheated us by abusing the system to satisfy their own needs. And the nhra staff just hunkers down and tells the racers they have bushwacked to send in letters pleading their cases. It's total BS!

I have copied all of this material and plan on presenting it to a newly promoted nhra executive.

[RJ Sledge]

Bruce

Why don't you share some of the finer points of what you plan on sending to NHRA, just so that we all can get on the same page.

I would like to see some solid ideas of what to do, not just saying that they (NHRA) have not done this or have done that.

I hope that you will provide some of what you are going to tell them.

How about using the top 5 hitters (or less for combo's that are one off's, i.e. Shelby, etc.) from each combo to run an average, instead of the everyone running that particular combo?

How about counting all runs at National Events instead of Qualifying and Eliminations?

How about not counting Record attempts when you go 1.40 under at Divisional races?

How about using 1000 ft times at National Events to get ride of the sandbagging?

How about having to tear down before you receive an Automatic hit?

Just a few things that I have been thinking about, anybody else have some ideas to kick around?

R J Sledge

[RJ Sledge]

Hey Dick, I forgot about the Altitude Factor situation that you mentioned, there needs to be a way to formulate something so that all Runs at National Events, both Sea Level and Altitude events get figured in.

The formulas that they use are extremely out dated and they need attention.

Any ideas?

R J

[bill dedman]

Bruce,

I am not a racer, and have no dog in this hunt, but I would like to submit a suggestion for your consideration.

To wit:
Please include with your laundry list of modifications/improvements to the AHFS, a suggestion that the business of factoring an engine in a PARTICULAR CHASSIS, and not "across the board" is illogical to the point of bizarre. An engine has no knowledge of what kind of chassis it's installed in and unless there are OVERT problems in constructing suitable headers, will make virtually the same flywheel horsepower in ANY Stocker chassis.

The racers I have talked to all agree that somebody with some axe to grind got this system into place, (were trhe racers polled???) and it surely does not contribute to a "level playing field."

Nobody seems to know where this came from. Do you know?

Thanks much for your time and attention.

Bll

[Mark Yacavone]

Bill, It makes perfect sense. Take a T/SA 283/220 wagon that goes 1.15 under and then subtract the weight difference of a Chevy II in I/SA with the same motor . Now look at the index difference. Tell me if the Chevy II needs hp put on it.