2010 Fuel Engine (1 Viewer)

[Fairlane63]

If I remember correctly, a couple of months ago, the Wilkerson team tested out a different engine set-up that the NHRA night be considering for next year to facilitate a return to the 1/4 mile. Since then, I haven't heard anything about it. So, does that mean...

A) the NHRA is throwing in the towel on returning to the 1320?
B) I haven't being paying attention and there has been news/ progress on this?
C) something different?

It seems that this would've been a big story, especially with the season well past the half-way point.

 

[Just Paul]

Who knows..

Last I heard they were waiting on parts to do more testing, but that was months ago.

 

[rollingthunder]

here i thought we were going to have a LOOKING forward post to
what a future fuel engine might look like !

 

[Bobby Bennett]

The NHRA was supposed to resume testing after the Western Swing, and could possibly run the combination at Norwalk's NUF. The hold up was parts again.

 

[Big Sexy]

...The hold up was parts again.

This worries me... If they can't get a few parts to build one or two motors, what makes the NHRA think they can switch to this and keep the entire field supplied....

Cranks for a short stroke engine are currently available. BME can make custom rods in a week, pistons in the same time.. Waterman can make pumps in less than a week...

This sounds very fishy.....

 

[yoda]

This worries me... If they can't get a few parts to build one or two motors, what makes the NHRA think they can switch to this and keep the entire field supplied....

Cranks for a short stroke engine are currently available. BME can make custom rods in a week, pistons in the same time.. Waterman can make pumps in less than a week...

This sounds very fishy.....

Still waiting to see which parts are working properly, IMO Justin. Once testing completes, wherever that winds up being, and the final specs are determined, more than enough manufacturers will be busy getting their CNC mills running at full tilt.

 

[FC138fan]

Haven't they come up with enough safety devices to return to 1320' next year with the same engine? If an incident like Scott's happened again, would the result have been the same with the automatic chute deploy / fire resistant chutes / safer shutdown area?

Are the safety numbers in? Does anyone have the average amount of engine explosions during the 1000' year - is it down significantly from 1320?

What percent of cars are not making it to the turnout (as in stopping early and getting a tow). Theyre not gaining much speed in that last 320' (15mph?), therefore isn't it only a difference of 320'? (as in if they were gaining a ton of speed in that last segment, they would need alot more then 320' of additional shutdown)

 

[PJ]

Haven't they come up with enough safety devices to return to 1320' next year with the same engine? If an incident like Scott's happened again, would the result have been the same with the automatic chute deploy / fire resistant chutes / safer shutdown area?

Are the safety numbers in? Does anyone have the average amount of engine explosions during the 1000' year - is it down significantly from 1320?

What percent of cars are not making it to the turnout (as in stopping early and getting a tow). Theyre not gaining much speed in that last 320' (15mph?), therefore isn't it only a difference of 320'? (as in if they were gaining a ton of speed in that last segment, they would need alot more then 320' of additional shutdown)

Actually it ends up being a gain of 640' feet. Not only are they not accelerating the full 1320, losing 320', it then made every shutdown area 320' longer as well.


I wonder if insurance (or at least cost) is behind the 1000' push. It may not be completely in NHRA's hands.

Personally I would prefer to see them back at the full 1/4 but I am worried how far they will castrate the cars in order to get them there. Perhaps the current 1000' config is the lesser evil.

I wouldn't mind seeing them go to 1320 at the tracks that can handle it and 1000 at the ones that can't. Baseball and nascar both have various size places , maybe it would work here too.

 

[FC138fan]

Actually it ends up being a gain of 640' feet. Not only are they not accelerating the full 1320, losing 320', it then made every shutdown area 320' longer as well.

You are correct, I forgot about that, good catch.

On a similar thought, I must have missed the thread talking about Alexis De Joria's TAFC crash at Englishtown this year. I heard (not sure if its fact) that the chute ripped the mount off the chassis and did something with the brakes where she had no chute and no breaks. She went out the back end at a high rate of speed (not sure what it was but it looked fast). She walked away from the crash.

Did this crash prove that if a worst case scenerio occurred, that the top end improvements alone are enough to warrant going back to 1320?

I agree with PJ in that instead of dealing with all the complexities of introducing new engines and car modifications, why not do 1320 at tracks that can handle it... Like Brainerd maybe? Get this on the fast track too, like in the next week and a half

 

[Big Sexy]

Still waiting to see which parts are working properly, IMO Justin. Once testing completes, wherever that winds up being, and the final specs are determined, more than enough manufacturers will be busy getting their CNC mills running at full tilt.

I understand that they need to try different combinations, but by the last report we saw, it took them over half of the day to get the new combo to idle. It would take many, many, tests to work out a solution, so why not stick with one until you rule out the possibility before buying new parts to try something different.

I know I don't have the inside info on all of this stuff, but to just come out stating that parts are not available is odd.

 

[Dave]

I think this no parts thing is a bunch of smoke. A buddy of mine who's longtime friends with somebody with hands on involvement in this project says the word on this deal is no-go. There have been too many problems getting the combination to work properly. If it did make it down the track, it was a pig. The story was that their quickest run was slower than an Top Alky car. Then there is the cost discussion. The numbers I've heard to make all the necessary changes are on the moon. I don't know about the 1000' or 1320', but I'd bet this new motor thing ain't gonna happen.

Dave

 

[T.Smith]

This worries me... If they can't get a few parts to build one or two motors, what makes the NHRA think they can switch to this and keep the entire field supplied....

Cranks for a short stroke engine are currently available. BME can make custom rods in a week, pistons in the same time.. Waterman can make pumps in less than a week...

This sounds very fishy.....

Justin....relax.

 

[kingcobrafan]

I wouldn't mind seeing them go to 1320 at the tracks that can handle it and 1000 at the ones that can't. Baseball and nascar both have various size places , maybe it would work here too.

Bullseye, PJ. WITHOUT the spec motor.

 

[Al smith]

perhaps i missed it. But what are the specifications of this mystery motor they are trying to get to idle?

 

[yoda]

I understand that they need to try different combinations, but by the last report we saw, it took them over half of the day to get the new combo to idle. It would take many, many, tests to work out a solution, so why not stick with one until you rule out the possibility before buying new parts to try something different.

I know I don't have the inside info on all of this stuff, but to just come out stating that parts are not available is odd.

Somehow me thinks everyone is expecting this whole shindig to be happening by Pomona 1 2010...

 

[Too many to list here]

perhaps i missed it. But what are the specifications of this mystery motor they are trying to get to idle?

Drag Racing Internet Magazine - Competition Plus.com - UPDATED NITRO TEST SPECS

 

[Bill]

Drag Racing Internet Magazine - Competition Plus.com - UPDATED NITRO TEST SPECS

That's just a tad over 413 cubic inches, in case anyone's interested...

 

[Nitrohelper]

it took them over half of the day to get the new combo to idle.

I don't understand why would the idle circuit be any different ?
When I talked with Tim about the combination at Eddyville he didn't mention it.
The camshaft they used is almost identical to what I run in the Telstar , it seems to idle ok?
The 3.50 gear for the dump truck rear end had to be specially made , all the engine parts are run by other classes.
Several guys run a 413 ci. in Classic Nitro. Seven to one compression has been used since the '60s.

 

[PJ]

I don't understand why would the idle circuit be any different ?
When I talked with Tim about the combination at Eddyville he didn't mention it.
The camshaft they used is almost identical to what I run in the Telstar , it seems to idle ok?
The 3.50 gear for the dump truck rear end had to be specially made , all the engine parts are run by other classes.
Several guys run a 413 ci. in Classic Nitro. Seven to one compression has been used since the '60s.

By no means do I have any clue on the combination but I wonder if taking all those items and trying to squeeze enough out of it to hit 300+ is some of the issue?

 

[Nitrohelper]

trying to squeeze enough out of it to hit 300+ is some of the issue?

That is the issue, I don't understand the massive changes all at once?
Just keep the same parts , take out a magneto first ,and then start reducing the blower overdrive, until they only go 300+ in good air.
Let the tuners develop the fuel pump size for their own tune-up.
Allow testing ( @ 1320') on the Mondays after a race with the new mag combination to find a baseline for further downsizing.
I would like to ultimately see a shorter stoke engine (less ci.& easier to pedal), and then allow 95% Nitro for the sound & and a tuning variable.