NHRA is 1000 ft now?
09-14-2008, 06:10 PM
#1
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NHRA is 1000 ft now? Just flipped on ESPN 2 and caught some NHRA race. All they keep talking about is "since we've switched to 1000 ft racing now...." I don't get it!
Forgive me if this is old news, I've been out of the country and without internet for the past 6 months. This sucks!
Forgive me if this is old news, I've been out of the country and without internet for the past 6 months. This sucks!
09-14-2008, 07:03 PM
#5
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So everything else is still 1320? Thats good. I guess if its in the name of safety, thats cool. They must be able to find a way to make it safer...hopefully 1320 will be back next year!
Trending Topics
09-14-2008, 08:34 PM
#8
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver,[KITSILANO].B.C. Canada *WestCoast*
Posts: 8,810
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NHRA said they will be looking for improvements to alot of tracks ..BEFORE...going back to 1320 FT / 1/4 mile runs.....
09-14-2008, 09:02 PM
#9
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ewing, NJ
Posts: 1,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shortening the track was a bunch of bullshit. They did it with the claim that it is safer because the cars blow motors past the 1000' mark, what happens the first round of qualifying with shortened runs? You guessed it, two guys popped motors before the finish line.
They aren't going to find the cure for a once in a lifetime boomer of an engine failure by shortening the track. They need to take away motor from these guys so the damn things stay together. There are a lot of options:
1. Take away NITRO! There is already a shortage of the stuff and due to federal regulation it can't be purchased in big quanities, so drop the percentage a lot. It saves the teams money and it is easier on equipment
2. Take away boost! Face it, you can change the amount of ovedrive in a blower all you want, with modern rotor and case designs you aren't doing much to actually lower the amount of boost they are running. Standardize the blower design and limit the PSI they are allowed to put in. It takes pressure off of parts and saves teams money since some components will last longer
3. Make rebuild rules! Much like F1 has gone to where you have to leave the thing together for 'X' number of passes. This will force teams to build in reliability instead of making consumable engines. Anyone who has followed the sport for a while knows how Austin used to talk about Force's "1000ft motors" openly, do they really think taking a few feet off the track has changed that mentality among the teams that can afford it?
Sorry about the rant, I just see this as one more clown move by the NHRA. Fuel cars are supposed to be the top of the sport, how "top" can they look if they can't even run the full track like everyone else?
They aren't going to find the cure for a once in a lifetime boomer of an engine failure by shortening the track. They need to take away motor from these guys so the damn things stay together. There are a lot of options:
1. Take away NITRO! There is already a shortage of the stuff and due to federal regulation it can't be purchased in big quanities, so drop the percentage a lot. It saves the teams money and it is easier on equipment
2. Take away boost! Face it, you can change the amount of ovedrive in a blower all you want, with modern rotor and case designs you aren't doing much to actually lower the amount of boost they are running. Standardize the blower design and limit the PSI they are allowed to put in. It takes pressure off of parts and saves teams money since some components will last longer
3. Make rebuild rules! Much like F1 has gone to where you have to leave the thing together for 'X' number of passes. This will force teams to build in reliability instead of making consumable engines. Anyone who has followed the sport for a while knows how Austin used to talk about Force's "1000ft motors" openly, do they really think taking a few feet off the track has changed that mentality among the teams that can afford it?
Sorry about the rant, I just see this as one more clown move by the NHRA. Fuel cars are supposed to be the top of the sport, how "top" can they look if they can't even run the full track like everyone else?
09-14-2008, 10:42 PM
#11
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ewing, NJ
Posts: 1,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No,their reason for shortening the track was because "the engines are failing past the 1000' mark". It is about the engines and making rules changes there is the only way things will change.
It was bad enough when they went to the NASCRAP championship system, now they are taking away part of what makes the sport what it is. I don't know where they find the jackasses that are running the major sanctioning bodies anymore, but they need to send them back.
It was bad enough when they went to the NASCRAP championship system, now they are taking away part of what makes the sport what it is. I don't know where they find the jackasses that are running the major sanctioning bodies anymore, but they need to send them back.
09-14-2008, 11:46 PM
#13
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ewing, NJ
Posts: 1,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lengthening shut down areas isn't realistic at a lot of tracks. At E-Town the back wall of the sand trap is only about 25 yards from Pension Road and the entry road behind the facility follows the edge of woods that don't belong to the track so they can't back it up either.
Most of these facilities are built to the exact size that will fit on the property. They just need to slow them down, the cars are going so fast that they aren't safe no matter what they do to the end of the track.
The accident that this is all a reaction to was such a massive blower explosion that Scott had to be knocked out. Brakes never got applied, chutes never came out. Every indication that the driver was just along for the ride. Why change the whole sport because the "worst case scenario" came along once after 2 decades of going 300+?
Most of these facilities are built to the exact size that will fit on the property. They just need to slow them down, the cars are going so fast that they aren't safe no matter what they do to the end of the track.
The accident that this is all a reaction to was such a massive blower explosion that Scott had to be knocked out. Brakes never got applied, chutes never came out. Every indication that the driver was just along for the ride. Why change the whole sport because the "worst case scenario" came along once after 2 decades of going 300+?
09-15-2008, 12:06 AM
#14
No,their reason for shortening the track was because "the engines are failing past the 1000' mark". It is about the engines and making rules changes there is the only way things will change.
It was bad enough when they went to the NASCRAP championship system, now they are taking away part of what makes the sport what it is. I don't know where they find the jackasses that are running the major sanctioning bodies anymore, but they need to send them back.
It was bad enough when they went to the NASCRAP championship system, now they are taking away part of what makes the sport what it is. I don't know where they find the jackasses that are running the major sanctioning bodies anymore, but they need to send them back.
where are you getting this information?! everywhere i have looked after reading your post has said that the nhra reduced the track legnth after the death of scott kallita. couldnt find a thing that said it was "because our engine blow up after 1000".
I suppose the "hans" device that is mandated in nascar is a waste after D.E. Sr's death too right?
and as far as the "jackasses that run the major santioning bodies" comment. dude get real, a driver died and they DID SOMETHING, much more than i think you could/would have done in your "armchair racecar". Take a seat.
09-15-2008, 12:10 AM
#15
On The Tree
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: East Coast
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think they should keep it at 1000ft and not take anything away from them. Schumacher ran like 314 today. That could have been in the 340 range in the 1/4 w/o the rev limiter
Have you even been to a race ?? You would never know they didn't go that extra 320 ft
and falk all of those rules this isn't IROC series er I mean nascar.
Have you even been to a race ?? You would never know they didn't go that extra 320 ft
and falk all of those rules this isn't IROC series er I mean nascar.
1. Take away NITRO! There is already a shortage of the stuff and due to federal regulation it can't be purchased in big quanities, so drop the percentage a lot. It saves the teams money and it is easier on equipment
2. Take away boost! Face it, you can change the amount of ovedrive in a blower all you want, with modern rotor and case designs you aren't doing much to actually lower the amount of boost they are running. Standardize the blower design and limit the PSI they are allowed to put in. It takes pressure off of parts and saves teams money since some components will last longer
3. Make rebuild rules! Much like F1 has gone to where you have to leave the thing together for 'X' number of passes. This will force teams to build in reliability instead of making consumable engines. Anyone who has followed the sport for a while knows how Austin used to talk about Force's "1000ft motors" openly, do they really think taking a few feet off the track has changed that mentality among the teams that can afford it?
2. Take away boost! Face it, you can change the amount of ovedrive in a blower all you want, with modern rotor and case designs you aren't doing much to actually lower the amount of boost they are running. Standardize the blower design and limit the PSI they are allowed to put in. It takes pressure off of parts and saves teams money since some components will last longer
3. Make rebuild rules! Much like F1 has gone to where you have to leave the thing together for 'X' number of passes. This will force teams to build in reliability instead of making consumable engines. Anyone who has followed the sport for a while knows how Austin used to talk about Force's "1000ft motors" openly, do they really think taking a few feet off the track has changed that mentality among the teams that can afford it?
Last edited by 1slowcar; 09-15-2008 at 12:16 AM.
09-15-2008, 01:08 AM
#16
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ewing, NJ
Posts: 1,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been to a lot of races in my life and never saw racing, or any other sport for that matter, make it less of a game at what is supposed to be the top level.
1/4 has been the distance for a long time. No more or fewer cars will wreck in 1000' than in 1320'. It is a non-move
The engines blowing up thing was first broadcast when Jim Head said it and then reinforced in some of the NHRA press releases later.
I am not asking for spec rules, just doing some things that would prevent what actually cause the accident, a massive blower explosion. Taking away blower are nitro are moves the NHRA has used before to slow the cars down, the idea of making them have engines last two passes instead of one is just an idea that some friends and I have discussed. The NHRA has also outlawed certain styles of blowers in the past because of the amount of boost they were capable of, even after pulley overdrive rules were first instated.
The fact that they are hitting such speeds in the shortened distance just speaks to the fact that they haven't made anything safer. It goes to show that the teams will push as hard as the rules allow. Do you think 314 is that much safer than the 330+ they were going before? I don't think a similar engine failure would be any more survivable now than it was before simply because it was a worst case scenario accident.
shtnfrds, there is a big difference between an actual safety device and letting cars continue to go unsurvivable speeds and calling it safe. The NHRA tried for a long time to take little steps to slow down the fuel cars, or at least maintain the speeds they were going. They finally have the perfect example of why they need to do it and they instead just went to a slightly slower version of the same old thing.
I have been around racing for 20+ years. Seen a lot of guys get hurt and die. This is the first time I have ever seen such a massive nothing done and seen it accepted as a solution by so many.
1/4 has been the distance for a long time. No more or fewer cars will wreck in 1000' than in 1320'. It is a non-move
The engines blowing up thing was first broadcast when Jim Head said it and then reinforced in some of the NHRA press releases later.
I am not asking for spec rules, just doing some things that would prevent what actually cause the accident, a massive blower explosion. Taking away blower are nitro are moves the NHRA has used before to slow the cars down, the idea of making them have engines last two passes instead of one is just an idea that some friends and I have discussed. The NHRA has also outlawed certain styles of blowers in the past because of the amount of boost they were capable of, even after pulley overdrive rules were first instated.
The fact that they are hitting such speeds in the shortened distance just speaks to the fact that they haven't made anything safer. It goes to show that the teams will push as hard as the rules allow. Do you think 314 is that much safer than the 330+ they were going before? I don't think a similar engine failure would be any more survivable now than it was before simply because it was a worst case scenario accident.
shtnfrds, there is a big difference between an actual safety device and letting cars continue to go unsurvivable speeds and calling it safe. The NHRA tried for a long time to take little steps to slow down the fuel cars, or at least maintain the speeds they were going. They finally have the perfect example of why they need to do it and they instead just went to a slightly slower version of the same old thing.
I have been around racing for 20+ years. Seen a lot of guys get hurt and die. This is the first time I have ever seen such a massive nothing done and seen it accepted as a solution by so many.
09-15-2008, 01:20 AM
#17
On The Tree
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: East Coast
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes because they have an extra 320 ft to stop and arent covering as much ground toward the end of the track. Worsham IIRC made a device deploy the chutes if they bang a blower. So giving them more stoping room and that device should help a lot.
09-15-2008, 01:48 AM
#18
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 1,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a GREAT article on what NHRA can do to slow down the cars. I cant find it but it was by one of the crew chiefs and it was seriously the EASIEST thing they can do to slow them down. ARGH ARGH ARGH
09-15-2008, 09:01 AM
#20
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I'm all about the safety of these guys, but I'm not about slowing them down. I'm sorry, make the cars safer, not slower. manditory bulkheads or motor blankets. Safer shut down areas, dead mans shut deployment systems. Technology marches on, and speeds and power outputs should be increasing, not decreasing. This is not spec racing, its Top Fuel, the baddest motorsport in the universe, where the guy with the most power and the biggest ***** goes home with the trophy!!!!!