Back Motor T/F 1971 - 72 (1 Viewer)

[Cliff]

Front to back: The rear-engine transition, Part 2

Don Garlits showed that the rear-engine design was here to stay with a powerful victory at the 1971 NHRA Winternationals.

www.nhra.com

This is a Phil Burgess article from a few years ago. I think 1971 - 1972 were the two most exciting years in T/F, due to Garlits running his version of the back motor car. I was at Lions when Garlits first ran his car, thought it was so strange to see the engine in the back (altho I had seen rear engined cars at San Fernando a few times). This is an interesting article & really shows the progression of the cars. Kinda makes ya wonder, what if front motor T/F cars still existed in T/F today?

 

[SoCal Racer]

They do Cliff - Nostalgia Top Fuel
What's interesting to me is the absence of a wing on those first rear engine cars. Within a year everyone had wings, although at Indy in '73 (might have been '74) Phil Hobbs tried to run without one and went up into smoke shortly after the launch and ended up going over the guardrail. After that I don't think anyone dared running without a wing!

 

[TopFuel@Lions]

Cliff, I am going to respectfully disagree with you on your timeline of 71 and 72 being the 2 most exciting years of AA/FD racing. Your argument of those 2 years is very strong with the front engine cars and the mid-engine rides, However in my view the years 1966 and 1967 are my most revered. No history lesson here to strengthen my view needed. Would take to long.

Dad and I of course were at Lions that day 'big' was there with that new ride. We were present when the car was unloaded, we were blown away as he backed the car out of the trailer. The Snake came up and said something rather snarky about the ride and here we are.


TopFuel@Lions

 

[Cliff]

Hmmmmmm..... David, I love Nostalgia AA/FD of today. Would like to see a 300" front engine chassis. It would run the same as other cars, just have a cool look to it. Maybe enclosed cockpit. Mark, 1966 was the first year a 6 second run was made in T/F, at Carlsbad, & I;m thinking it was John Mulligan??? Was a normal smokey run & I think the ET was 6.99 or around there. 1967 - slipper clutches came into vogue & cars started running 6's on a regular basis. Man, there is sooooo much history in drag racing. So many things that stand out over the years. Cook & Bedwell running 166 in Feb 1957, caused the nitro ban. You know how hard it would be to come up with the Top 100 milestones in drag racing? Heh

 

[Nunz]

They do Cliff - Nostalgia Top Fuel
What's interesting to me is the absence of a wing on those first rear engine cars. Within a year everyone had wings, although at Indy in '73 (might have been '74) Phil Hobbs tried to run without one and went up into smoke shortly after the launch and ended up going over the guardrail. After that I don't think anyone dared running without a wing!

I was there and saw Hobbs climb over the guardrail, but I’m pretty sure it was the early ‘80s.

 

[Cliff]

The Hobbs car had a ground effects tunnel under the engine & no wing. I saw video of that crash-it was scary.

 

[J. S.]

As an aside to this discussion, I really think Connie Swingle was right when he called Swamp Rat 14 a "front driver car", not a rear-engine car. The engine wasn't in the "back". The location of the engine in relation to the front and rear wheels has never really changed from where they were located on the "front engine" cars. It is the driver's position that changed. They basically just moved the driver compartment/roll cage from behind and between the rear wheels, to in front of the engine. So 'front driver " car is really much more accurate.

Yeah, I know after 50 years, we're not going to start calling them front driver cars instead of rear engine cars, but after re-reading the 2 Volume Mickey Bryant books on the development of Garlits' Swamp Rat 14, I really think Swingle was right!

 

[Cliff]

Hi Jon. After Garlits came out with his version of the front driver car, there was a big discussion. The car we call rear engine today is actually a mid-engine car, cuz the engine is in front of the rear axle. A true rear engined car would be like a VW Bug - engine behind the rear axle. There was an illustrator named Kenny Swaja (spelling), and he drew 3 cars. Front engined, mid-engine & a rear engined T/F car with the engine behind the rear axle. Looked strange, but probably would have worked. Wish I could find those drawings, which appeared in a drag mag.

In 1971, after Garlits introduced his car, the team of Schultz & Glenn came out with a front engined car, which had the engine location about the same as a funny car. Looked kind of strange, but it set the world record at Lions at 6.41 ET. I was there, They ran 6.41 twice. If you look at the measurements, it would kind of be the same as Garlits front driver car. they just shifted the weight around with each design. I think F/C & T/F today are kinda similiar in that way. Garlits said in 1971 that the engine being (literally) next to the rear end gave the best traction, There was no trans in the car, just direct drive. It's interesting to me how these cars have developed over the years & how you can trace them to early 1950's, when they took an old Model A chassis & moved the engine next to the rear end, & the driver sat behind the rear end. Crude, but it worked. OK enuf ramblin. I'm good with a front driver car.

 

[Cliff]

Drag Race Central | Presented by Summitracing.com

Drag racing results, news photos and highlights from NHRA and IHRA series events

www.dragracecentral.com

OK, I made a mistake. It was Steve Swaja who I thought did the drawings, but I found this link, & it sez it was Tom West who did it. Anyhoo, look at the 2nd photo & that's the illustration.

 

[TopFuel@Lions]

See post #2 for my call of mid-engine.


TopFuel@lions

 

[Al]

I was there and saw Hobbs climb over the guardrail, but I’m pretty sure it was the early ‘80s.

Wow, was I ever there too. It was the 1984 US Nationals. I was seated on the tower side about a quarter of the way up the stands at about 1000 feet. The car went up and over
the guardrail and continued to grind itself on the OUTSIDE of the guardrail with the throttle stuck wide-open. Then it spun around just before it reached me and it looked like it
was going through the chain link fence and into the stands where I was sitting. I turned around and started running up the stands to get away, but then the spin continued back
into the guardrail and the engine ran out of fuel (since the fuel tank was long gone). Shortly after, I saw National Dragster's photo editor talking to the guy that had been sitting in
front of me. I believe it was him that shot one of the two sets of footage that Diamond P used in their coverage.
He was indeed running without a wing BUT he had a ground effects tunnel on the car that a crew member stood / rode on while the car was backing up from the burnout !
Everyone said he crashed because he didn't have a wing. I disagree. He smoked the tires at the hit of the throttle and the throttle stuck. He hit the guardrail well before a
wing would have taken effect. Having said that, if his tunnel didn't work, he could have crashed at the finish line and he would have gotten much more than the broken ankle
that he got. So who knows ?

 

[glofria]

Personally, I would love to see a class for the Can Am bodied cars like Herm Petersen had. But that's just me.

 

[Cliff]

Maybe a Wedge car like Prudhommes'.

 

[SoCal Racer]

I was there and saw Hobbs climb over the guardrail, but I’m pretty sure it was the early ‘80s.

I was there too and you may very well be right about the era. I went to almost every Indy from 1973-1995 and they kind of run together - especially since it has been decades ago!

 

[SoCal Racer]

Maybe a Wedge car like Prudhommes'.

I'll pass on the wedge cars, remembering the Poncho Rendon wedge driven by Connie Kalitta that crashed heavily at Indy in 1971. Well it seemed like a good idea, but it just didn't pan out.

 

[Al]

I was there and saw Hobbs climb over the guardrail, but I’m pretty sure it was the early ‘80s.

It was Indy in 1984. I was there and the car stopped right in front of me (I had just started running away as it spun around for a second, pointing right at me!). On the TV coverage, Steve Evans blamed the crash on no wing. I have always disagreed as I was right there ! Hobbs smoked the tires at the hit. The throttle stuck wide open and he hit the guardrail really early. He climbed over the guardrail, on the top, then onto the back side getting impaled on the posts, clearing off the front of the car with the fuel tank in it. It finally ran out of fuel and died right at the grandstands. Scary for sure. But the car never reached enough speed before it crashed for the wing to do anything. Therefore, in my opinion, the lack of a wing had no baring on the crash.