New cars, old cars and horsepower ratings.

[art leong]

Originally Posted by KRatcliff

If you rely on the ECU to tune the car going down the track then you will be slower. The ECUs are not capable of reading, correcting, and optimizing the tune within the few seconds of the pass IMHO.

Of course, I am still learning and have a long ways to go.

I have heard that in order to do this a very very very expensive O2 sensor is needed. Almost as much as the cost of the car. And you would need one for each cylinder.

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by KRatcliff

If you rely on the ECU to tune the car going down the track then you will be slower. The ECUs are not capable of reading, correcting, and optimizing the tune within the few seconds of the pass IMHO.

Of course, I am still learning and have a long ways to go.

Your absolutely correct. I hear that all the time. It does not work that well. I don't know many fast guys doing it that way. That is assuming it always runs quickest, in all weather, with any number of water grains, at the same air/fuel ratio. Not in the real world. The majority of the faster EFI cars use it as a reference, same as the carbureted guys do. We have different tune ups, or fuel pressure adjustments we make for different conditions, just like the carb guys changing jets. The guys telling the "It tunes it's self going down the track" simply don't know what most of us actually do. I have helped several guys pick up by putting their cars back into Open Loop so they don't try to make adjustements. It simply does not work that well in the real world.

[69Cobra]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Your absolutely correct. I hear that all the time. It does not work that well. I don't know many fast guys doing it that way. That is assuming it always runs quickest, in all weather, with any number of water grains, at the same air/fuel ratio. Not in the real world. The majority of the faster EFI cars use it as a reference, same as the carbureted guys do. We have different tune ups, or fuel pressure adjustments we make for different conditions, just like the carb guys changing jets. The guys telling the "It tunes it's self going down the track" simply don't know what most of us actually do. I have helped several guys pick up by putting their cars back into Open Loop so they don't try to make adjustements. It simply does not work that well in the real world.

I must have misunderstood what I was told then. I used to hang around some NMRA guys and I was under the assumption that a certain Super Street Outlaw turbo car that was pretty fast and was being tuned this way. I have no first hand knowledge just hearsay. The EFI guys can tune cylinder to cylinder better and more efficient than you can with a carb, yes???

[KRatcliff]

Originally Posted by 69Cobra

I must have misunderstood what I was told then. I used to hang around some NMRA guys and I was under the assumption that a certain Super Street Outlaw turbo car that was pretty fast and was being tuned this way. I have no first hand knowledge just hearsay. The EFI guys can tune cylinder to cylinder better and more efficient than you can with a carb, yes???

Very few can do each cylinder properly. It is slightly more exact than a carb car with staggered jetting, but that isn't all you are limited to on a carb car. You still have the ability to advance and retard timing to each cylinder and/or hotter/colder staggered plugs.

[Ed Wright]

You can, most don't. You do know how to stagger jet a carb, right? If you don 't, you need to learn how. We were doing that in the 1970s. Sharper guys before that, I'm sure. Tuned properly, that turbo car would be at least as fast in open loop. If his ECU has to make adjustments going down the track he hasn't done a real good job of tuning it.

[KRatcliff]

Originally Posted by art leong

I have heard that in order to do this a very very very expensive O2 sensor is needed. Almost as much as the cost of the car. And you would need one for each cylinder.

Plus you would have to have an ECU with a much faster Baud rate and far faster processing.

[Marvin Robinson]

OK, we got a lot of comments, suggestions and complaints, but here is MY list of what makes sense so far:

1. The new cars are not a problem for the RACER because they are new, it's because the HP factors are totally out of the ballpark.

2. The manufacturers have a vested interest in the new cars dominating class racing, so they stacked the HP deck, and NHRA allowed it.

3. AFHS is working too slowly, and the FI, Computer and carbureted cars have different tools available to tune, and different infrastructures for their building and race support.

4. The cost of entering the "new" car classes is prohibitive for most of the Sportsman racers that have been racing their favorite car for a long time, stacking the S/SS ranks with "bucks up" supported teams and individuals.... this is a disincentive for the longtime participants in S/SS, who are now at a competitive disadvantage in both performance and money.

Am I on point so far??? Suggestions for fixes follow on next post. Sorry, I accidentally duplicated this post.....

[Marvin Robinson]

OK, we got a lot of comments, suggestions and complaints, but here is MY list of what makes sense so far:

1. The new cars are not a problem for the RACER because they are new, it's because the HP factors are totally out of the ballpark.

2. The manufacturers have a vested interest in the new cars dominating class racing, so they stacked the HP deck, and NHRA allowed it.

3. AFHS is working too slowly, and the FI, Computer and carbureted cars have different tools available to tune, and different infrastructures for their building and race support.

4. The cost of entering the "new" car classes is prohibitive for most of the Sportsman racers that have been racing their favorite car for a long time, stacking the S/SS ranks with "bucks up" supported teams and individuals.... this is a disincentive for the longtime participants in S/SS, who are now at a competitive disadvantage in both performance and money.

Am I on point so far??? Suggestions for fixes follow on next post

[Ed Wright]

#3 covers two different subjects, but otherwise pretty close.

[Marvin Robinson]

Alright, here is my take on the suggestions so far....

I think a good solution is emerging among the comments, especially when you combine idieas from Bad Banana, Capt Cobrajet, Jeff, Sammy, 442Olds and X-Tech who are all kinda in the same framework, and Myron, who also addresses the marketing side (which the Big 3 are primarily interested in). Just trying to give credit where it is due

1. Factors need to be examined and adjusted ASAP. I would suggest reviewing these by going thru this year's runs and making the adjustments over the Winter.

1a. New cars need HP, older cars need WT break. (You could do one or the other, but a combo is probably the most fair, let old cars lighten up some, and add HP to the newer ones. 1/8 mile performances from this year are probably the fairest assessement)

2. FI/Computer cars need to run in their own classes, the TOOLS to make adjustments are in a different league from the carbureted cars and they definitely have an advantage in ease of adjustment and precision over the older cars - level 'em out by letting them compete with each other in class eliminatons.

2a. Supercharged cars need to be in their own class - period.

3. Readjust the indexes so they are more realistic. (Something on the order of .5 seems to make sense to me... cars should not routinely be .8 - 1.2 under.)

4. More classes and crate motors are not a good solution, this would dilute classes and make the eliminator even more difficult to monitor and manage... not what we need.

5. Better media coverage of the S/SS would give manufacturers the exposure they crave.

Old idea, not likely to get much play, but a joint NHRA/Racer committee should be looking over this stuff on an ongoing basis, and have seasonal meetings to assess and make changes, with racer representation in the form of divisional delegates to vote. The actual number and structure of this body would need to be "discussed" and agreed on....

These measures seem to cover most of the bases fairly and are doable, if the will to do so is there on the part of NHRA At the very least, they suggest a workable framework for improvement.... just one racer's opinion

I think if these measured are done realistically, we could make S/SS much better for everybody....