FEEDBACK ARTICLE – STEVE MATUSEK'S SHELBY - A REAL PRO STOCKER?


Pro Stock has indeed come far afield from its roots. As a fan, I think it is high time that NHRA return P/S to its roots as a class that runs a combo that the average fan can relate to as being a car he could purchase. - Dale Tuley

 

FEEDBACK ARTICLE – STEVE MATUSEK'S SHELBY - A REAL PRO STOCKER?


Pro Stock has indeed come far afield from its roots. As a fan, I think it is high time that NHRA return P/S to its roots as a class that runs a combo that the average fan can relate to as being a car he could purchase. - Dale Tuley


Leave Pro Stock alone!  It is fine the way it is in both racing series --IHRA and NHRA.  It is the best show out there.

I do not want to see any Rice Burners, turbos or front wheel drive cars in Pro Stock! - Frank Doyle


Twin turbos in Pro Stock? How did the word stock get into this project? Cost? Of course Ford would like this. They sell a lot of Mustangs without having to build a competitive engine for Pro Stock. It stinks of corporate interference in drag racing that is too big now. - John Duffy



While I whole-heartily applaud Steve Matusek's efforts to show that the Pro Stock class can still be exciting and interesting for those who want to innovate with another engine combinations more closely aligned to actual street stockers.  But he virtually has no chance of seriously influencing any actual change in NHRA Pro Stocks.

The cry will go up immediately about the investments already made in the current engine/class combinations.  But the real fact is, NHRA is no longer the exciting organization that it began as, encouraging and in some ways celebrating innovation as one of its founding principle - bring your outlandish new ideas to straight-line racing and as long as they're safe, give it a try.  That's gone and been gone for more than a decade.

Now innovation is severely limited, even discouraged in any broader ways that are not sanctioned by NHRA.  They now have and proclaim a basic closed-door philosophy to new ideas.  That justification is currently packaged and sold to the racers and public as concern for the protecting racers from further expenditures, and while somewhat valid, it's in fact been the NHRA’s guiding principle for several decades and most recently, closely following the NASCAR mode in controlling-all-aspects.  Yes, to the NHRA, innovation an enemy.

Why won't they leave open the ability for someone who wants to innovate, and incur that expense on their own, to do just that in any class - pro or sportsman?

What if the idea - in this case small inches with turbo - does run faster and with more reliability than the present pro stock combinations?  Everyone would not have to change over.  Take what is being done - and done badly by the NHRA presently - with the current pro bike combinations.  Adjust to create class parity.  It's done all the time, and has been since drag racing began.  Clearly it works if the NHRA wants it to and doesn't play favorites.  And that DOES leave the door open for those of us who were and still are intrigued and passionate to innovate.

Again, I heartily support Steve Matusek's efforts.  Perhaps he needs to try the IHRA or the ADRL circuits to follow his ideas and passions. - Ken Tesoriere

DISCLAIMER - The views presented in these feedback letters are the opinions of the individual author, and do not necessarily represent those of CompetitionPlus.com, its staff and advertisers.   

 

{loadposition feedback}