Leebone
Nitro Member
The only thing that I can figure is, your seats must have been past the 1000 foot mark.
1000 FT for everyone? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Super Mod
- Start date
The only thing that I can figure is, your seats must have been past the 1000 foot mark.
Brent,
If the majority of the drivers are for 1,000 ft then what is the problem? The last time I check it is their asses in the driver's seat and not you or I. I will support what makes them the most comfortable.
MW
Nitro Member
A quarter of the track is gone, and if you could not tell the difference you were not paying attention or consumed too many wobbly pops.
Leebone
Nitro Member
Wobbly Pops? Mmmm, I'll have to look for those next time I'm at the track.
My seats were at the starting line and the only difference I could tell is, the roar went away "as" the cars were passing the finish line signs, instead of "after."
I'm more into the cars themselves than I am the length of the track, but I understand what you are saying.
LS
I wouldn't mind some 1000 and some 1320 butI'm not sure how much effect that would have on tune ups and more importantly budgets.
Yes there is a difference. Maybe the average fan can't tell. Going back and forth between the 2 distances between classes makes it more obvious. Move the scoreboards closer and that would alter people's perception of it then. Either way I can live it. I fear that to go back to 1320 that they would back up performance too much.
Hard to decide which side to be on without all the info
Yes there is a difference. Maybe the average fan can't tell. Going back and forth between the 2 distances between classes makes it more obvious. Move the scoreboards closer and that would alter people's perception of it then. Either way I can live it. I fear that to go back to 1320 that they would back up performance too much.
Hard to decide which side to be on without all the info
Jeff Burk has been on a crusade to save this sport from any Risk what so ever! First he thought going 1/8 mile was the way to go, then he thought NHRA should Ban Supercharger's from the Fuel classes. It amazes me how these guys who don't pay a dime to watch this sport, yet feel they know what's best for those of us who DO fork out the Ass to Support it!
AS for the 1000' after watching 4 races at that distance I'm content to leave it there since the teams are saving so much money! Plus from where I sit around 100' It's not nearly as Bad as I thought. But I guarantee you had Tony Pedregon's Explosion at Pomona happened on a 1000' ft track (He Blew up at 900'!) Burk would be the first one to say he told us NHRA Needed to go 1/8 mile!
AS for the 1000' after watching 4 races at that distance I'm content to leave it there since the teams are saving so much money! Plus from where I sit around 100' It's not nearly as Bad as I thought. But I guarantee you had Tony Pedregon's Explosion at Pomona happened on a 1000' ft track (He Blew up at 900'!) Burk would be the first one to say he told us NHRA Needed to go 1/8 mile!
Last edited:
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
1,000ft is the best thing to happen to NITRO in years. We've all seen what happens when they restrict, BLOW-UPS. Leave the nitro percentage, comp ratio, blower drive, and everything alone. I like seeing BOTH cars cross the finish under power instead of one or both coasting.
I've been to two 1Kft races, and enjoyed them both. Less down time for clean-ups. Heck at ZMAX they were so far ahead of schedual they had nothing to fill with cause the race was so clean.
As far as everything going 1K ?
Jeremy has a good point, maybe at the long tracks they could go 1320, and 1K at the rest.
I've been to two 1Kft races, and enjoyed them both. Less down time for clean-ups. Heck at ZMAX they were so far ahead of schedual they had nothing to fill with cause the race was so clean.
As far as everything going 1K ?
Jeremy has a good point, maybe at the long tracks they could go 1320, and 1K at the rest.
yoda
Nitro Member
You blow it up, your fine is to keep it in the trailer at the next city or cough up the big bucks that go into an end-of-the-year fund (I bet that team owners would be pi$$ed to know they contributed to some other team's bank account- that would keep the rods in them).
If you can tune it clean to 1000', you can tune it clean to 1320. WTF is the problem- we have seen thousands of clean 1320 runs, and a few egoists that knowingly miss that mark.
Get back to it...
If you can tune it clean to 1000', you can tune it clean to 1320. WTF is the problem- we have seen thousands of clean 1320 runs, and a few egoists that knowingly miss that mark.
Get back to it...
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
Mark, what I meant by coasting is by far most blow ups happen after 1,000ft. It was common to see them not make it to the finish line.
As far as tune ups changing, not so. Like Coil said "we've already been racing to 1,000ft."
If they go back to 1320 and change rules, we'll be back to blow ups, just like rev limiters, nitro% changes, ect.
The 1,000ft made no change in tune up, no costly R&D for the "little" guy.
And it didn't make any tracks obsolete, goodness knows we don't need to lose any more tracks.
As far as tune ups changing, not so. Like Coil said "we've already been racing to 1,000ft."
If they go back to 1320 and change rules, we'll be back to blow ups, just like rev limiters, nitro% changes, ect.
The 1,000ft made no change in tune up, no costly R&D for the "little" guy.
And it didn't make any tracks obsolete, goodness knows we don't need to lose any more tracks.
Chi-Town Brown
Nitro Member
Now there is a quote from someone of the keybord crew chief ranks.
Just so you know. All the DESTRUCTION is after the 4 second mark when the "Revlimiter or ETlimiter" goes into affect. Runs are now clean because there done before the box starts taking timing out. Tuneups are no differant now than they were at 1320. When they ran 1320 the key was to get as far down track as you could before the box kicked in. And that was rite around 1000 foot on a good clean pass.
yoda
Nitro Member
Ask anyone that knows Dan- they don't hit the limiter in 1320 unless they are eating up parts already or have blown through the clutch....
FC138fan
Nitro Member
All this talk about money and the 1000' deal. The unsponsored cars are really the only ones who can use that argument. Can't sponsors put the squeeze on teams who blow their stuff up too much? Or can you tell a sponsor that "look, if you wanna win, we gotta run it on the edge and with that parts are going to fail and it's going to be expensive"
Same deal with the tuners complaining.. you get paid millions of dollars to tune the car, so if they make changes then that means you have to use your TUNING SKILLS to get the car down the track. Thats like me complaining if my work wants to change from using one word processor to another. If I held out and complained I'd probably get fired and they would find someone else.
If it's in the name of safety, make the cars / tracks safer. If there is no other option, then keep the 1000'. But if you really put your mind to it, you can find a way to make the cars safer without restricting performance.
When budgets get out of control in other sports they come up with the salary cap. Otherwise you get the Yankees, Cowboys, or old Redwings.. teams that dominate because they go buy everything they need and bully the poor teams. Maybe its a dumb idea but what if the NHRA put a cap on the amount of money a team can spend in a weekend (not including salaries), or the number of pistons, blocks, blowers etc. can use, while leaving the cars as is. This would decrase parts usage wouldn't it? Back in the day when people only had one engine, had only enough money to eat at Wendy's, they made it work...
Maybe they can use that safety foam they used in those future cop cars in the Stallone movie "Demolition Man"
Same deal with the tuners complaining.. you get paid millions of dollars to tune the car, so if they make changes then that means you have to use your TUNING SKILLS to get the car down the track. Thats like me complaining if my work wants to change from using one word processor to another. If I held out and complained I'd probably get fired and they would find someone else.
If it's in the name of safety, make the cars / tracks safer. If there is no other option, then keep the 1000'. But if you really put your mind to it, you can find a way to make the cars safer without restricting performance.
When budgets get out of control in other sports they come up with the salary cap. Otherwise you get the Yankees, Cowboys, or old Redwings.. teams that dominate because they go buy everything they need and bully the poor teams. Maybe its a dumb idea but what if the NHRA put a cap on the amount of money a team can spend in a weekend (not including salaries), or the number of pistons, blocks, blowers etc. can use, while leaving the cars as is. This would decrase parts usage wouldn't it? Back in the day when people only had one engine, had only enough money to eat at Wendy's, they made it work...
Maybe they can use that safety foam they used in those future cop cars in the Stallone movie "Demolition Man"
Last edited:
330 in 1320 is just fine....fix the tracks ! I want to see the ticket sales next season.....nobody in my circle will be going to watch 1000 ft. again ( call us all cry-babies if you must) !
I want 1320 yesterday. I CAN tell the difference between a 1000' and 1320'. I don't care what it costs. It costs what it costs to race these cars. It is not the job of NHRA to tell DSR he can only spend so much so that we can have a bunch of once-a-year-weekend-topfuelers be able to make the show.
So many fans are acting like they have been biting thier nails for years because they figured 1320' was so expensive and dangerous for the drivers and now they can breathe a sigh of relief that everything's all better all of a sudden.
It's a dangerous sport, no doubt about it. But so is my drive to the track to watch these guys. I fell in love with the NHRA as a kid because of what the sport was.....err is. That means 1320' racing. Like many others on here say, why not just make it 60' racing. Or just christmas tree RT's, don't even leave the line...yeah, we'll just get rid of the cars all together since it's so expensive for the little guy. They are trying to ruin the sport and the pace at which they are doing it is picking up.
How many of you would watch the NFL is they shortened the field 25% and told the players they can only run so fast? Oh yeah, and football players get hurt pretty badly as well, many are in wheel chairs to this day due to paralysis. Life is dangerous.
rant over
So many fans are acting like they have been biting thier nails for years because they figured 1320' was so expensive and dangerous for the drivers and now they can breathe a sigh of relief that everything's all better all of a sudden.
It's a dangerous sport, no doubt about it. But so is my drive to the track to watch these guys. I fell in love with the NHRA as a kid because of what the sport was.....err is. That means 1320' racing. Like many others on here say, why not just make it 60' racing. Or just christmas tree RT's, don't even leave the line...yeah, we'll just get rid of the cars all together since it's so expensive for the little guy. They are trying to ruin the sport and the pace at which they are doing it is picking up.
How many of you would watch the NFL is they shortened the field 25% and told the players they can only run so fast? Oh yeah, and football players get hurt pretty badly as well, many are in wheel chairs to this day due to paralysis. Life is dangerous.
rant over
FABMAN
Nitro Member
Maybe I misunderstood the thread. Are they talking about 1000' for all classes and making it permanent. If the fuel teams are happy running 1000' then thats what it should be, but changing the other classes would be ridiculous I see no safety issues related to shutdown distance in those classes. Alcohol classes should have a choice also since their speeds are getting faster. If all tracks do improvements that Indy and TexPlex have done everyone should be fine as far as track safety goes.
Dave
Nitro Member
All of this supposed (according to the article) complaning from the teams is the same thing that was going on a few years ago when NHRA and Dale Armstrong were working on this idea the first time around. NHRA was going to make a compression rule and all the tuners complained. So NHRA just left it alone. Now they are talking about making the compression rule again and the teams are crying about it again. According to the article, it sounds like NHRA might back down again. WHY??? I am not one to bash NHRA but if they back down on this, they might as well close up shop and end Drag Racing forever. In my opinion, it is time for NHRA to grow so balls and say, "Look guys, we ARE doing this compression thing and we ARE going back to 1320' so deal with it". Is NHRA worried these teams are going to say no and go racing somewhere else? Where the hell are they going to go? Nothing against the other sanctioning bodies, but NHRA is at the top of the heap in Nitro Drag Racing. The owners and tuners are crying about the cost, what else is new? I have a lot of respect for most of the owners and most of the crew chiefs listed in that article, but don't we all complain about the rising costs of going Drag Racing? Just like Don Prudhomme said would happen, they're blowing their $hit up before 1000'. I'll bet before the season is over, we'll see some more big boomers. How is that not costing more money? According to the article, Lance Larsen said the guys will just run more fuel through the engine. Didn't Dale Armstrong say the guys will think they can just run more fuel through the engine? I recall him saying it wouldn't work. I don't have a link to the Armstrong article but I'm pretty sure he said it. Of all of these people complaining about how much it will cost, I want to know how much more will it cost? Have any of them really sat down and figured out how much they will be out after making the changes, testing it, and running it for a season? Or is this lastest money gripe just another ploy by some folks to avoid having to change their tune-up? Most fans think the 1000' thing is dumb. The fans are NHRA's customers and if the customer is not satisfied with the product, they won't buy it anymore. NHRA, you are the boss and it is your ballpark. If doing this compression thing will make 1320' Drag Racing possible again, DO IT!!! Make the customers happy again and if the teams are pissed, tough. I dare 'em to find another big time Nitro Drag Racing series to race at.
Dave
Dave
I would also like to see 1320 again. If it stays here, with the current tune-ups, the grenades will start to be more common, then what? I think in the big picture, a milder tune-up is the answer, and looking into the future may make it more affordable and attractive to new teams.
Super Mod
Nitro Member
The purpose of the thread was to point out that rumor has it NHRA plans to implement 1000 ft racing for ALL classes. Personally, I can't think of a good reason to punish the "slower" cars because the grenade classes don't want to spend the money for decreased compression R & D. I am a sportsman racer and I don't like the idea of changing anything on my car or how I run my car just because the fuel classes don't want to make adjustments to get back to 1320 racing. If the fuel classes can't run 1320 then I say segregate,don't homogilate
Last edited:
The purpose of the thread was to point out that rumor has it NHRA plans to implement 1000 ft racing for ALL classes. Personally, I can't think of a good reason to punish the "slower" cars because the grenade classes don't want to spend the money for decreased compression R & D. I am a sportsman racer and I don't like the idea of changing anything on my car or how I run my car just because the fuel classes don't want to make adjustments to get back to 1320 racing. If the fuel classes can't run 1320 then I say segregate,don't homogilate
Jack, I'm curious what % of Sportsman racers would like going 1000'? That being said, the higher dollar racers would just run their motors harder knowing they didn't have to push them as far down track.
