Regarding this traction angle to the discussion. It simply doesn't factor in to the correction. It assumes equal traction. Which really isn't that fantastic of an idea unless you're talking some ridiculous extreme like racing on Mt. Everest vs. the dead sea.

The effect the altitude has on whp isn't so huge that it's going to make a night or day difference in traction. Maybe if a car was just barely on the edge of holding at high altitude it might spin down lower. Which can simply be overcome by driver skill in the first place.

If someone gets a good 60' time at a high altitude I'm having a real hard time buying the idea that it will be spin city down lower. I doubt it will have near as much of an affect as some of you think.

I can see that some people still want to just harp on this and debate away. Just simply say it. You think the NHRA is wrong for allowing elevation corrected times to count for records in the classes that they do. That's all you have to say here rather than go on trying to debate all the little idiosyncracies. Why don't you just email tech@nhra.com and let them know how dumb they are?

 

Seems like you really don't want to concede your opinion either. I could give a rats *** about records in the classes that allow correction, I don't race those classes nor do I follow them. Why don't you simply just say it. You like using a corrected number so your car does not look slow to other people. Like I said before, tell the DA so people who are smart enough can see what is really going on. Also I have to say, NHRA is not really he end all be all of the drag racing world. Sure they are decent organization and yes they have helped further the sport and make it safer, but they also have a bunch of rules that make no sense in our current time. Example, according to the NHRA rules a BONE STOCK 04 Cobra should have a roll cage in order to make a pass, same with a new ZO6. You have to remember that many of these rules were written decades ago, when cars were much less safe than they are now.

 

I have never, EVER presented a corrected number as my actual time.

PS: I'm being stubborn about this for two reasons. Number one, you guys are stubborn as hell about it. And number two, that bum Mishri got a job so I have to fill in for him here.

 

So why do you care so much about what we think? I never said NHRA is wrong, just that many, many people mistake what the correction is used for. Like I said I could care less about those classes, the are really boring. They use throttle stops and all kinds of other BS electronics to help them run right on their index every time. Sorry but that is not my idea of a drag race. Why are you so bent on what other peoples opinion of the NHRA is. I am sure I would not be the first one to email bitching about their rules, but why would I take the time to care about that?

 

The NHRA is supposed to be an authority on the subject. Therefore, it would seem that if those correction tables are good enough for them then people should kinda drop the skepticism a little bit when someone mentions what their ET corrects down to. Someone else brought it up in another thread elsewhere on the forum, asking if the NHRA accepted them for records which in turn implied that if they did it would then be more believable.

 

Look, if you don't race any of the three classes that the NHRA tech specified, just give it up. It's plain pointless.

if you tried to talk like that to a guy in 10.5's or renegade, or outlaw, or any one of the classes that people REALLY race in, you'd get laughed out of the track.

DA corrections don't mean sh*t, and they will never mean sh*t. They aren't what you run, so they have no bearing on any competition, whatsoever.

Doesn't matter if a guy with a Z06 says " I ran a 10.9" in phoenix, and I go "well my 11.07 in tucson (6300' DA) translates to a 10.7, so ha", I would expect him to laugh his *** off and not take me seriously.

You run what you run. That's the end of the discussion.

 

LOL

 

Then he's a ****ing idiot. Altitude affects performance this isn't some radical concept. In your example we're talking 3 tenths of a second. Depending on how wide of a difference there is between the two altitudes the idea that a car running 11.07 in tucson would run a time 3 tenths off in phoenix shouldn't be that unbelievable.

 

Really? Some of the da corrected times you and others are talking about are nearly a second faster. That is huge. There has to be a big difference in hp to make that much in correction. The hp difference would definitely affect traction.

 

Like me (as I stated earlier). My corrected times vary from 12.8 -13.0x.
I run consistant 14.1x-14.2x from at least a 6300' DA. This is on street tires, leaving at about 1500-1800 rpm (a small chirp maybe). I seriously doubt I could pull off a 12.85 on street tires.

Another reason I won't post the corrected time is the fact that I don't think I've seen a auto with my exact mods run a 12.8-13.0 on street tires. All I can really do is "wonder".