Want a list of SS or Stk cars sitting.

[Dick Butler]

I would favor a separate Heads up Race for these cars but after enough time for 4-8 to be entering a race. Only reason to include them in a Stk or SS eliminator name would be to give the first one or two a place to be included at a points race. I even thought of making them at a wt break and rule to be included in SS/CS or other current class. I know they couldn't win a heads up with a full bore legal class car but at least they could run eliminator at any event they desired and would be an example for others to see and talk about. THEN as more were built the group present could create a "pot" and ask to run Heads up on time trial day for the money.
Micheal- I did it with TOP/STK and TOP/SS and everyone LOVED it. Hard to get the entire race seen if you cannot control when it is run or the announcer is busy telling stories in the tower when the racers are running.
Thanks to those who understand the desire to make a "difference" in a long standing methods so accepted but hoping to again get the crowd involved and improve the costs.

[Don Kennedy]

Originally Posted by Dick Butler

I would favor a separate Heads up Race for these cars but after enough time for 4-8 to be entering a race. Only reason to include them in a Stk or SS eliminator name would be to give the first one or two a place to be included at a points race. I even thought of making them at a wt break and rule to be included in SS/CS or other current class. I know they couldn't win a heads up with a full bore legal class car but at least they could run eliminator at any event they desired and would be an example for others to see and talk about. THEN as more were built the group present could create a "pot" and ask to run Heads up on time trial day for the money.
Micheal- I did it with TOP/STK and TOP/SS and everyone LOVED it. Hard to get the entire race seen if you cannot control when it is run or the announcer is busy telling stories in the tower when the racers are running.
Thanks to those who understand the desire to make a "difference" in a long standing methods so accepted but hoping to again get the crowd involved and improve the costs.

Stock and Super Stock as it is now is not broken> The present rules are working fine and there is no need to have a heads up racing . This type of racing will fail based on the past forms of racing , it starts out ok then when racers figure out the "fact" that the racer with the most money in heads up racing will always win then this form of racing will die . The past history of heads up racing is proof it will not work ,heck it is even not working with the Pros as just about everyone can see there are less and less Pros running because the Pros who have the most money win all the time so let Stock and Super Stock continue as is the factoring system will take care of the HP figures .

[randy wilson]

The way presented has never before been tried.

[HR9121]

Originally Posted by randy wilson

The way presented has never before been tried.

Its the same thing as before, just represented differently. You even said you tried it at your track and it eventually failed.

[randy wilson]

It never failed. We never had less then 400 spectators, and as many as 1,500. I got tired of running the track, and competing. Try it some time and tell me how easy it is. You won't find a truthful racer that says it failed. The anything goes at Eddyville failed. I've had numerous racers call and beg me to reopen but it ain't worth it to me.

[Ron Middleton]

If I remember correctly, wasn't Super Modified class started under this same pretense? Spectators always prefer heads up racing to handicap racing but money usually waters down or kills the class before it's over. I like it though when somebody looks outside the box. Just like Humpy Wheeler saying he knows how to fix Rockingham and bring it back with a new class. Hew won't try it but I like his way of thinking.

[HR9121]

Originally Posted by randy wilson

It never failed. We never had less then 400 spectators, and as many as 1,500. I got tired of running the track, and competing. Try it some time and tell me how easy it is. You won't find a truthful racer that says it failed. The anything goes at Eddyville failed. I've had numerous racers call and beg me to reopen but it ain't worth it to me.

I'm sorry i misunderstood you, still looks like the same ugly girl just put on a different dress to me though. Heads up racing does draw the spectators but eventually they leave when the car counts drop because everyone cant keep up with who has the money, and that is proven as yall say.

[Dick Butler]

Don Kennedy, Which class do you run currently? Just curious are there any other combinations which you must beat to win class or do you just like eliminator racing?
Some people are very satisfied, I support them. I just know there are many who feel defeated when their expensive Stk or SS project runs up against a combination which never has seen factoring or ....
For those worried about money, would you buy a 130,000 Mustang or Dodge or Copo if a year rule came into affect?

I believe Modified was very popular with spectators and racers. Can someone remember was there a bad drop in participation ? Was that why NHRA dropped it?

[Mike Carr]

The original question, about cars currently sitting. Mine is. 1992 Oldsmobile Toronado Trofeo that runs in DF/S (ex-Tom Kasch car). It would never fit in your proposed (for the 187th time) class. Would have no interest regardless. Every type of heads-up "affordable" (lmao) class has failed as long as I have been alive. And good money says this won't work either. Spec this, sealed that, spec anything has very little interest to many. The current way of class racing ENCOURAGES diversity, to build what you want, for whatever reason(s). You eliminate that 100% by making a rule with spec/identical stuff, there is no incentive to try to find something better, because, by the rules, you can't.

[randy wilson]

The only thing spec is the head. I don't believe for one second this approach has ever been tried. Plenty of room for innovation, but just not as expensive.