|
A different, logical way of allowing components (or not)
|
Moderator Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,501 |
The organizations choose a horsepower number. Legal vehicles in any class with hp which exceeds that number, that class is allowed to have a component.
The controversy is agreeing on a hp number. At least this way, there is a more objective metric to help make the decision. The hp number is subjective, but past that, the decision to allow or disallow components is taken care of. |
|
Re: A different, logical way of allowing components (or not)
|
Registered: 11/24/2019 Posts: 294 |
Doesn’t work in so called farm stock classes, won’t work at the higher levels either. You can make a computerized dyno read whatever you want it to read. Ran mine on a dyno a few years ago and the operator showed with my engine, with me witnessing it, a 100 horse difference just by changing a couple of computer settings. This was on a 650ish horse engine. And getting someone to reveal what they ran on the dyno will never happen. |
|
Re: A different, logical way of allowing components (or not)
|
Moderator Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,501 |
Dirtfarmer, what you described is not exactly what I'm proposing.
The idea is for a class, not someone's vehicle. If the organization decides vehicles above 1200, 1500, 2000 or whatever hp number they choose, components are allowed in that class. People may not know what Joe Blow's specific hp is, but as a group there should be a fairly realistic consensus as to the general hp of a 4.1, light pro, or whatever class. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2025 03:27PM by The Original Michael. |
|
Re: A different, logical way of allowing components (or not)
|
Registered: 02/25/2014 Posts: 125 |
LLSS is about one turbo rule change away from when Pro Stock went component, if you want to use that as the metric. |
|
Re: A different, logical way of allowing components (or not)
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,597 |
I've always said that all classes will go component eventually, but how we get there is a very important discussion. We need some sort of tangible metrics to use as a rough guideline. Simply shouting that we NEED components in a given class anytime someone breaks a hub isn't a good way to make rule changes. I think using overall class HP is a reasonable metric to use. My question is should weight of the class be a factor? For example 2000HP at 6000lbs is very different than 2000HP at 10,000 lbs. Should we account for those differences? Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
Global: Topics: 39,084, Posts: 234,266, Members: 3,490.
This forum: Topics: 37,809, Posts: 230,591.
Website Daily and Monthy Hits: http://pulloff.com/webalizer
Our newest member BG1066
