Pro Stock Parity into the realm of chance? (1 Viewer)

[nick name]

I was just checking out the 3rd round PS qualifying sheet and noticed some interesting things.

The eight cars from #3 to # 10 are separated by .006 seconds.

11 of the 16 qualifiers have a least one other car that ran the exact ET to the thousandths - thereby going to speed for the tie breaker.

The entire qualified field is within .05 seconds. That's pretty tight but nowhere near a record.

Those who have followed drag racing for any length of time know exactly how tiny an increment a thousandth of a second is.

NHRA, in the interest of easier tech and NASCAR-like parity, has allowed generic slotcar-type bodies and engines that are far more alike than showing any sort of brand differences.

Are we to the point that races are consistently decided by something other than the car or driver performing better than its opponent?

Thowing out driver performance for the sake of argument, if you stage two cars that have exactly the same performance as the other - to the thousandth of a second - you should have an outcome identical to the odds of a coin flip.

I'm not making a case one way or the other, but thought I'd throw out the question for any discussion that might arise.

Personally, it's nice to see the emphasis back on the driver leaving on time and hitting the points. There are so many capable crew chiefs at this time I believe that car setup is becoming less of a factor as many tuners now have the capability to get it right every time.

Sure wish the cars reflected a bit more of their heritage, though. That includes wheelbase, windshield angle, width, profile, and overhangs. Wasn't that part of racing in the first place, to find out whose design was best?

 

[Jamie]

Are we to the point that races are consistently decided by something other than the car or driver performing better than its opponent?

No. How many races this year have been decided by a margin of .0000 seconds?

 

[none]

The issue is not the cookie cutter cars. It still comes down to power, clutch, gear setup, chassis setup and a team with a driver that can get it done everytime. Pro Stock is not nor will it ever be fuel racing. I believe it is harder than any other car out there. You still have to shift a Pro Stock and every inch of a lane can change minute by minute and lane by lane. The close racing just proves that we are lucky to have so many smart people working in the same direction. As it goes for the bodies "what the heck is a funny car." And when was the last time you saw a none hemi win in fuel racing. If thier is a class that got rid of it's history "it's funny car". I enjoy fuel racing but give me pro stock any day of the week.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Rocketman 207]

Sure wish the cars reflected a bit more of their heritage, though. That includes wheelbase, windshield angle, width, profile, and overhangs. Wasn't that part of racing in the first place, to find out whose design was best?

It was at one time; unfortunately not the case today!

 

[jpee]

I enjoy fuel racing but give me pro stock any day of the week.

Just my 2 cents.

I'm with ya all the way.... Yup FC are nice to watch.. but for "CLOSE" racing PS is the place to be... Right now #16 can win a PS race.. Dan question... I like and respect Bob Gliddon.. he's one of the BEST areound... but my question is.. if PS was like it was back when Gliddon had a full TENTH on the rest of the field would that make PS more fun? Right now if any ONE PS car was consistently .08 faster than the rest of the field everyone would be racing for the #2 spot..

HE** Even SC could qualify if his car was .10 faster than the rest of the PS field,... but that would not be good.. because he just got a PROMOTION To R & D and if he had been qualifying he would still be "Only a Driver"

 

[none]

NHRA, in the interest of easier tech and NASCAR-like parity, has allowed generic slotcar-type bodies and engines that are far more alike than showing any sort of brand differences.

Have you seen a HEMI?

Alan

 

[john]

Have you seen a HEMI?

Alan

Good point, and aren't the MOPAR cars wider and thus more frontal area?

 

[nick name]

Have you seen a HEMI?

Alan

Sure.

To my old fogy, traditional mind Mopar is really pushing things calling it a hemi in the first place. Until they redefined the term, it stood for a hemispherical (half round, or half sphere) chamber and had nothing to do with the placement of the spark plug.

The current Mopar hemi isn't even close to having a half sphere chamber. When I first saw one of the heads it really reminded me of a GM head with the plug rotated 60 degress or so, therefore being mounted in the upper part of the chamber instead of on the side. So I'd call it a modified wedge.

Sorry, but that's not a hemi.

Would you consider the head that R-M played with back in the 80's a hemi? It had an extra plug in the top of the chamber. Just curious.

Anyhow, nice to "talk" to you again.

 

[nick name]

Dan question... I like and respect Bob Gliddon.. he's one of the BEST areound... but my question is.. if PS was like it was back when Gliddon had a full TENTH on the rest of the field would that make PS more fun? Right now if any ONE PS car was consistently .08 faster than the rest of the field everyone would be racing for the #2 spot..

HE** Even SC could qualify if his car was .10 faster than the rest of the PS field,... but that would not be good.. because he just got a PROMOTION To R & D and if he had been qualifying he would still be "Only a Driver"

No, I agree with you (how many years has THAT been? ) a tenth would make for lousy racing. I'm talking about still having a tight field, but what has me wondering about today is that the field can get clustered around .001 or two.

Like I said, when it's that close we may be having races decided by chance.

 

[nick name]

No. How many races this year have been decided by a margin of .0000 seconds?

I'm not sure that there have been any, but that's not what I'm asking.

Think about reaction times. While a good driver can cluster them in a fairly small range, no human that I know of can control them to .010 or maybe .020.

If I were a betting man, I would put up whatever money I had against ANY non-electronic aid driver being able to predict the RT within a hundredth. And I'd still bet strong that they couldn't get within .020 or maybe even .030.

So, if we consider that a couple hundredths at the line are probably just random, what does that say about the outcome of the races?

Your name sounds familiar. Did you used to run PM?

 

[none]

Dan,

My point is that if you look at a HEMI Pro Stock engine, it (from the outside) resembles an early HEMI. That was important to the DC guys when the project started. If your average fan sees one he knows it's not a Chevy.

And I know all about the internals of the new HEMI, I was there.

Alan

Nice to talk to you as well

 

[Crash]

ANY non-electronic aid driver being able to predict the RT within a hundredth. And I'd still bet strong that they couldn't get within .020 or maybe even .030.


Electronics can only slow down your reaction, they don't make it more predictable, or faster. You still have to react to the tree. Off topic, but I felt the need to clarify.
Carry on....

 

[nick name]

ANY non-electronic aid driver being able to predict the RT within a hundredth. And I'd still bet strong that they couldn't get within .020 or maybe even .030.


Electronics can only slow down your reaction, they don't make it more predictable, or faster. You still have to react to the tree. Off topic, but I felt the need to clarify.
Carry on....

Good point.

I should have been clearer, as I was using box vehicles as a sort of shorthand for ones that don't have variables in air gap, lever ratio, or friction material.

But you are exactly right that RT is RT regardless of what bulb is being reacted to.