NHRA GSA 2011 Rules Amendments

[Buns]

The 2011 rule changes have been posted.

http://www.nhra.com/UserFiles/file/2011RuleBookAmendments.pdf

What do you think?

 

[Draw 3D]

The 2011 rule changes have been posted.

http://www.nhra.com/UserFiles/file/2011RuleBookAmendments.pdf

What do you think?

Doesn't affect my class so no comment.

Besides, this is just the beginning of rule changes.

 

[HEMI6point1]

Will the rule limiting twin turbo setups to 88mm instead of 91mm really make that much of a difference?

 

[Crew Chief Pro]

Will the rule limiting twin turbo setups to 88mm instead of 91mm really make that much of a difference?

350 to 400 HP.

Drop it from 3950 hp down to *only* 3600 hp is my guess.

 

[twostep]

Appears they took a little bite out of the blower cars too. Nitrous racers may be breathing a bit easier.

 

[Toejam]

350 to 400 HP.

Drop it from 3950 hp down to *only* 3600 hp is my guess.

3mm takes away 350-400 HP? That I find hard to believe!

 

[You!]

Off topic a little...did anyone else here receive the email from Glendora (Div. 7) concerning the proposed index change for S/C & S/G?

I've let my membership expire so I'm not sure why I was even on the list, but some of you current guys must have gotten it, right?

 

[Crew Chief Pro]

Off topic a little...did anyone else here receive the email from Glendora (Div. 7) concerning the proposed index change for S/C & S/G?

I've let my membership expire so I'm not sure why I was even on the list, but some of you current guys must have gotten it, right?

We all received it. Doubt it will change since they are the most appealing classes for racers right now.

But if they speed it up 1 second I am ready.

 

[twostep]

3mm takes away 350-400 HP? That I find hard to believe!

Perhaps not, Joe. 91mm to 88 mm, despite being only 3mm, is actually a 7 percent reduction in area, if you do the math. It makes more difference than you think.

 

[mick]

carbon fiber brakes mandatory for TAD, TAFC, PS, NFC & TF....not ProMod?

 

[clwill]

I'm confused. There was a document released (with the same file name) back in October that was much longer, and with a lot more changes. Like requirements for SFI roll cage padding in a number of classes, and so on. Remember reviewing it in detail.

Not sure why NHRA would release two docs, with the same name, but with different content??

 

[Nunz]

Are they actually thinking of speeding up the super classes? By how much?

 

[clwill]

Are they actually thinking of speeding up the super classes? By how much?

That's the question. The survey asks: leave alone, drop by 0.5, or drop by 1.0.

There's a lot of discussion, on the forums, at the track, everywhere, about this. Some feel that dropping the indexes significantly will take out most of the time on the stops and make the classes less painful to watch. Others point out that the classes have been like they are for ages, and maybe it's time they kept up. The counterargument is that this will chase some people out, as they can't afford (or don't want to) speed up by that much. Then of course there are those who say "take away the electronics, run them old school".

Currently, from what I hear, the sentiment is running vastly in favor of changing nothing. Except perhaps the "Scotty Rule" in S/ST, which is very unpopular.

FWIW, and not like you asked, but I think they should do two things:

1) As long as the index is relatively arbitrary, pick a nice round number. Whoever came up with x.90 was just not thinking clearly. Ever try to explain to someone that 8.898 is a breakout but 8.989 is really slow? Make it x.00. A breakout is obvious.

2) Make the distinctions not based on body type, just on index. Let a dragster that can't make the SC index run in SG, and so on. Have three or four classes (say 7.00, 8.00, 9.00, and 10.00) and just say "run watcha brung". If you have to say that a driver can only run one of these classes to keep the sharks out of the tank, fine.

That's my opinion, but none of these are options on the questionnaire.

Chris

 

[Toejam]

Are they actually thinking of speeding up the super classes? By how much?

I used to wonder where the .90 came from? Why not 9.00 or 10.00, might be more understandable to novice spectators!

 

[handsome]

I used to wonder where the .90 came from? Why not 9.00 or 10.00, might be more understandable to novice spectators!

you mean to say people actually watch those classes?

 

[NYNitro86]

i watch it, but i gotta because of an event in September gotta stay on my info

i still like it don't get me wrong

 

[Toejam]

you mean to say people actually watch those classes?

Ahh......Good Point!

 

[rocketman]

Very few people do and in my opinion this is due to the electronic enhanced big motor throttle stop combinations. There is a reason that fewer spectators go to points races any more. They are not the grand events they use to be due to the over-electronic domination of the super classes. There is a lot that needs to be done and the first thing on my list would be dump the electronics in all classes. Sorry.

 

[Draw 3D]

Very few people do and in my opinion this is due to the electronic enhanced big motor throttle stop combinations. There is a reason that fewer spectators go to points races any more. They are not the grand events they use to be due to the over-electronic domination of the super classes. There is a lot that needs to be done and the first thing on my list would be dump the electronics in all classes. Sorry.

Rich, totally agree.

On my car, the only electronics is the trans-brake. If I suck as a driver then I either get better or get a different driver.

I'm there to have fun driving, not have a bunch of transistors get all "excited" and "shocked".

 

[Super Mod]

you mean to say people actually watch those classes?

I have to stand at the 1000ft mark. It makes me ill if I stand to close to the starting line