1000 Foot Impressions (2 Viewers)

[shawn fleischmann]

I was sitting at 1000' at maple grove for the final qualifying session on saturday. I'm still mixed about it, i've broken the numbers down to adding .7 and you'll get what the 1320' e.t. would be, and i guess that my thoughts were proved true when phil burkart said that last year he ran a 4.15 to 1000' and ended up with a 4.85 in similar conditions. But I noticed some things and thought about them when I was waiting for them to clean up after Dixon's explosion( that was some pretty intense heat)
1) Even with the 1000' finish line the drivers aren't getting off the throttle until around the 1/4 mile marker and only pulling one chute
2) There seems to be more oil downs from cars towards the end of the shut off area from cars that at the 1/4 mile finish line probably wouldn't have oiled the track. So my thoughts was that maybe with the longer shut down area that gives them more time to fill up the puke tank and eventually over flow it. So maybe a larger puke tank is in order?

 

[clwill]

pretty much unanimous in this thread isn't it.

Not here. You see, I love drag racing. Do I love 1000'? No. Do I understand yet if a 4.1 is a good time? Also no. Am I going to behave like a 3-year old and throw a little tantrum, holding my breath until they bring back 1/4 mile? Heck no.

Been to four races this year (one at 1000'), and I'm going to Vegas and Pomona too. Racing is racing. Nitro cars are still loud and fun to watch/feel/breathe. The pits are still fun to troll. The competition in F/C hasn't been this tight in years.

So you all can throw your little hissy fits, I'm enjoying the sport I love.

 

[.]

So you all can throw your little hissy fits, I'm enjoying the sport I love.

Excellent! You're entitled to your opinion as are the rest of us.

Hissy fits? Not hardly!

 

[my friends call me Zappy]

I like the 1K' for several reasons:
A lot more races with BOTH cars reaching the stripe under power.
FAR less down time for clean-ups.
We don't lose any tracks because they can't lengthen.
Saves nitro
It's safer.

Now I havn't seen it in person yet, but on TV it's great.

 

[Buzzz Miller]

Don't you just love it when someone has to belittle your opinion because it is different than theirs?

 

[clwill]

Don't you just love it when someone has to belittle your opinion because it is different than theirs?

I'm not belittling the opinion, I don't really like 1000' either. I just think the behavior and attitude are childish.

Someone died. Some of the bravest people you'll ever meet admitted they were shaken and even scared. NHRA did the best, fastest thing they could do to help. This thread is your response. Great.

 

[RacerRose]

I like the 1K' for several reasons:
A lot more races with BOTH cars reaching the stripe under power.
FAR less down time for clean-ups.
We don't lose any tracks because they can't lengthen.
Saves nitro
It's safer.

Now I havn't seen it in person yet, but on TV it's great.

I gotta agree with you, Paul. I'll chime in here with the only other positive opinion about 1000 ft. fuel racing. I went to Maple Grove on Friday and Sunday. Took my nephew Friday, then took wife & brother on Sunday. I enjoyed it just as much as I have the previous 28 years of watching drag racing in person. I think the overall racing with closer finishes & side-by-side runs have increased.

Would I like to see them go back to the full 1320 ? Yes, but then again, I'm content with the 1000 ft. deal. I just NEVER want to see 1/8 mile fuel racing at a national event level. To me, that would be the end of attending national events.

 

[TooTall999]

I saw 1000' racing at Brainerd and couldn't get over the impression that the cars were shutting off early.I understand why they had to shorten it as a temporary fix,but hopefully they'll come up with a viable way to return to 1320'.

 

[GREGSTER]

I watched them go 1000ft in brainerd as well and i didnt like it. i did however enjoy the alcohol classes much better as well as the rest of the sportsman classes. I do hope they go back to 1320 next year and slow the cars down.

 

[Triple Nickel II]

I'm kind of hoping this change, and the reaction of it, will get more people to watch the sportsman classes and not just head to pits.

IHRA has already announced that "if" they take National Events to 1000 ft for the pros, it will also go to 1000 ft at those events for the sportsman classes.

Look for NHRA to do the same.

 

[d'kid]

IHRA has already announced that "if" they take National Events to 1000 ft for the pros, it will also go to 1000 ft at those events for the sportsman classes.

Look for NHRA to do the same.

That would be a 'Can of Worms'... Divisional @ 1320, NE's at 1000... so, the 7.9 cars would be 7.2 at ne's?... take .7 off the index, then the best running under that?

Did I say Can of Worms? I meant Pit of Snakes...

d'kid

 

[mick]

the biggest problem with buying up more property to make the shut down longer is these tracks are boxed in. pamona is a perfect example.........

pomona is perfect example; dump the place; move on........
OCIR, Ontario........ find a new location and copy the concord facility.
the money's there; racers, sponsors, sanc. bodies and track owners.

 

[Dave]

In my opinion, this 1000' thing is just too strange. I realize why NHRA felt they needed to make a change but it really isn't working. I think Dixon said it best at Maple Grove when he blew it up in qualifying. The distance is just shorter, this does not make the engine any less powerful. They're blowing them up again and it's only been a couple months since the change. 1000' (in my opinion) is not going to fix the problem. From what I've seen, the guys are still running them to the 1320. The cars are too powerful. I don't mean to sound cold-hearted, I felt just as bad as anybody about Scott. It is a tragedy that that had to happen. That said, why didn't NHRA change to 1000' after all those guys went across he street at Columbus? How about when Worsham and Force flipped in the sand at Pomona? Or when Kenny Bernstein went off the end at Maple Grove? How about when Bobby Lagana went of the end at an IHRA event and suffered serious injuries? Why didn't NHRA do anything then? Why didn't they start slowing the cars down then before somebody did get killed? Maybe I'm contradicting myself with some of these examples. Some of these incidents occured at much slower speeds than how fast Scott was going, but still there was a problem. The cars are too fast and powerful and the shutdown areas need work. Those are two areas that should be the most important thing to NHRA right now. I like what I've heard about what Billy has done at the Motorplex. That's the best idea have heard yet. If you like 1000' great, if you don't that's great too. Whatever your opinion is about it, I can see one constant. Nobody likes 1000' and it better go back to 1320 or this sport will suffer.

Dave

 

[NHRADeuce]

pomona is perfect example; dump the place; move on........
OCIR, Ontario........ find a new location and copy the concord facility.
the money's there; racers, sponsors, sanc. bodies and track owners.

It's not that simple. Bruton spent $60 million building zMax. That's 4x more that he spent on Vegas. Finding new places to build tracks is not exactly a walk in the park. There would be at least half a dozen if not more tracks that would have to be replaced if you count places that cannot be expanded. Finding suitable locations in big enough markets would be very hard if not impossible.

This year I have been to Atlanta, Bristol, and E-town for 1320 and Reading for 1000. From the starting line the racing was great and I couldn't tell the difference. I still have to ask what a good run as I haven't gotten used to the 3-sec thing, but that will come in time it they stick to 1000'. I'm just not all that concerned with it. I would love for them to go back to 1320 but I'm not going to stop going to races if they don't.

 

[FC138fan]

First time I read they were going to 1000'-

"Man this sucks so bad! I don't want to go to Brainerd, I don't want to watch the races. I want a refund and I'll never go back. Why can't they just restrict the cars?"

First time I saw it on TV-

"These times are wierd.. but it really doesn't look much different. Should they restrict the cars - or would it be better to leave them because its the ultimate in engineering speed..."

First pass in Brainerd -

"This is awesome! I can't believe I was considering not coming here! It's the same as it's always been (we sit at the start). It still sounds, smells, and feels the same! The pits, the fans, the racing, the sights, the sounds, the ZOO.. its all the same! I can't wait till next year!"

Is the NHRA headed for trouble yes - but 1000' is not the reason why
Is 1320' racing better then 1000' of course

BUT

Are these cars still 8000 hp, more then any other motorsport? of course
Are they still the loudest cars you can watch? of course
Are they still the quickest accelerating vehicles on the planet? of course
Are they still the fastest form of motorsport? of course
Is an NHRA event the same as its always been? of course

It's a temporary deal Im sure, theyll be back to 1320 next year, but will the changes be worse then the 1000' deal? I don't know

So to those who plan on not going, this might be the last chance to see these finely engineered quickest and fastest vehicles, cause when the changes come down, they will not be as quick or as fast.. So next year we might be saying "what a quarter mile pass... but remember when they were 8000 hp and they could accelerate from 0 to 100 in .8 seconds... now theyre so restricted it's not really racing.."

 

[Dave]

So to those who plan on not going, this might be the last chance to see these finely engineered quickest and fastest vehicles, cause when the changes come down, they will not be as quick or as fast.. So next year we might be saying "what a quarter mile pass... but remember when they were 8000 hp and they could accelerate from 0 to 100 in .8 seconds... now theyre so restricted it's not really racing.."

That is a great point, Nick. I never looked at it that way.

Dave

 

[None]

I saw 1000 foot racing in Brainerd and thought it sucked! I would like to see the NHRA slow the cars down and return the track to 1320 feet. It's not the tracks fault, they didn't get shorter...... the cars got faster. Slow the cars back down and fix the root of the problem.

It is the tracks fault. How many years have the tracks taken the money and not made any improvements? NHRA owned tracks are the worst. People come to see the quickest-fastest cars on earth set records. Leave the restricter plate racing to nascar and the sportsman. They need new tracks if the old ones can not be improved. The new technology every year
will make the older tracks obsolete even at a 1000 feet.

 

[TJ]

Most track owners are not making big bucks and rarely make a good living. They are struggling in the finance dept.
The 1000 ft deal was not only for safety improvements but also to attract more teams to play ball w/ the shortened arena---hence saving money on wear and tear...

 

[None]

Most track owners are not making big bucks and rarely make a good living. They are struggling in the finance dept.
The 1000 ft deal was not only for safety improvements but also to attract more teams to play ball w/ the shortened arena---hence saving money on wear and tear...

I understand the safety part and I do not have any problem with 1000 feet.
I do have a problem with slowing them down. Kind of like going to Bonnyville
to watch the four bangers run.

 

[The Counterfeiter]

It is the tracks fault. How many years have the tracks taken the money and not made any improvements? NHRA owned tracks are the worst. People come to see the quickest-fastest cars on earth set records. Leave the restricter plate racing to nascar and the sportsman. They need new tracks if the old ones can not be improved. The new technology every year will make the older tracks obsolete even at a 1000 feet.

John - if you were the owner of a track that couldn't be expanded, what would you do? Bruton has reportedly spent 60 million to build zMax Dragway on land that he already controlled! Do you walk away and try to convince lenders or investors that building a new facility 30 to 50 miles from a metro area to run races in a series that has major problems is a good idea?
If that doesn't happen (and it won't) does NHRA just cancel races at tracks that don't meet a standard?
BTW . . . there is no new technology allowed in fuel racing - improvements in materials (i.e. billet blowers) have reached the limit of the rules.
NASCAR, Formula 1 and IRL were all forced to slow cars for safety - that is the only option if NHRA is going to survive.