Dale Armstrong's Plan (1 Viewer)

[none]

Bob,

Being difficult? Not for a second. I love a good discussion, The first thing that comes to mind is camshaft and port design. Both manifold and head. Just as you don't use the same port on a 450ci COMP engine as you do on a 500ci Pro Stocker, there would be some gains to be made there. I would also think that the teams with the best blowers would have a HUGE advantage. Remember Mike Ashley's team coming out with their new in house blowers last year (or was it two years ago?) They started setting top speed every other week. Now if I have a blower that isn't as good, I would just run it 1 or 2% faster and I'm at least close. but if we are both restricted to 35% the guy with the best blower wins.

30 years ago Pro Stockers were running 9's. Now Stockers are. The racers will never stop trying to go faster, it's just not in their nature.

P.S. I am not against Dale's plan. I'm saying that it's not a magic cure-all.

Alan

 

[megadeth]

Bob,

Being difficult? Not for a second. I love a good discussion, The first thing that comes to mind is camshaft and port design. Both manifold and head. Just as you don't use the same port on a 450ci COMP engine as you do on a 500ci Pro Stocker, there would be some gains to be made there. I would also think that the teams with the best blowers would have a HUGE advantage. Remember Mike Ashley's team coming out with their new in house blowers last year (or was it two years ago?) They started setting top speed every other week. Now if I have a blower that isn't as good, I would just run it 1 or 2% faster and I'm at least close. but if we are both restricted to 35% the guy with the best blower wins.

30 years ago Pro Stockers were running 9's. Now Stockers are. The racers will never stop trying to go faster, it's just not in their nature.

P.S. I am not against Dale's plan. I'm saying that it's not a magic cure-all.

Alan

Thanks Alan that was interesting.
I think NHRA can mandate Blowers, which would take that option out of play, but I totally get it.
Racers are always on the quest for more power and that little bit of performance advantage.

 

[NHRADeuce]

I understand what you are saying Alan but why would Dale state there would be no way to circumvent that simple of a change he recommended if there was?

If you control the compression and blowers which limits the ability to feed more air limiting the ability to increase more fuel were would the performance gains come from?
Since the heads and block restrictions are also limited. I really would like to know were the possibility of performance gain would come from I’m not trying to be difficult.

Dale says that there is no way to circumvent the 2 changes he is suggesting. He also goes on to say that crew chiefs would look elsewhere for gains. Even TF engines are not 100% efficient so there are gains to be made if you can find how to increase efficiency. Dale mentions ignition timing and cam timing are two places you could see gains.

 

[Muddy]

I understand what you are saying Alan but why would Dale state there would be no way to circumvent that simple of a change he recommended if there was?

If you control the compression and blowers which limits the ability to feed more air limiting the ability to increase more fuel were would the performance gains come from?
Since the heads and block restrictions are also limited. I really would like to know were the possibility of performance gain would come from I’m not trying to be difficult.

They are doing a bunch with the injector configuration/air flow, movement of weight to different locations depending on track conditions, rotating mass weights, valve train weight and geometry, friction factors thruout the entire race car and engine, motor angle and so on. There are so many areas where subtle changes make a small difference. Over a period of time each small change gradually totals up to a big difference.

 

[The Swegian]

Having the utmost respect for AA Dale, I found this to be great reading. As usual CompetitionPlus.com is leading the pack, thanks Bobby.

The part I found interesting was this:

You beat me to it Paul. I was ready to quote Dale's comment but you already did. That was a very key statement in all this controversy. Great interview. Thanks Bobby.

 

[Bobby Bennett]

So what, the big dollar teams will have the high dollar superchargers and the others will have the normal stuff. How is that any different than what we have now?

Chances are it's not gonna matter cause the nitro will run them all broke anyway .

 

[megadeth]

So what, the big dollar teams will have the high dollar superchargers and the others will have the normal stuff. How is that any different than what we have now?

Chances are it's not gonna matter cause the nitro will run them all broke anyway .

Good point Bobby!

 

[Treeshaker]

Just another point of view:

When DA ran his tests, the fuel pumps were 20 - 30 gpm smaller, ignition timing profiles were in their enfancy if used at all, superchargers and injectors were archaic compared to today's. And he said only one car ran quicker than the low compression car on that day and it wasn't by much, so why would it slow down today's cars by 2 - 3 tenths?

I would say 90% of the teams have the piston, rod, head gasket combo to run the 6:1 compression and the pullies to run the blower overdrive specified. It would be an easy deal to get the right camshaft for this combination. Dell was right on when he said maintenance would be critical and the high dollar teams would have the advantage still because they could always have the newest, best parts. Even with the 50% overdrive rule, teams have old blower cases stacked up in the shop, just think what it would be like with a lower OD requirment. And just the case of choice today costs 5 grand a piece.

It could never become a "spec" motor, because the internals of a nitro motor change every run, even running them "soft" like DA calls for. Blocks vary on their deck height, used ones get shorter with age and they are usually out of square. Combustion chamber's vary in size with use, every valve job changes the cc's. Rods get compressed on some runs and elongated on others, while pistons become "sunken" in the middle. "Budget" teams service these parts and make up for the descrepencies with rod length, piston height and gasket thickness.

DA's ideas are a start, but many other things need to be implemented at the same time to get the desired results. Plus the tech team would have to grow tremendously in both personnel and knowledge, because as DA says, many things that are "outside the rules" are going on all the time at the track.

 

["Dr. Dirt"]

Welcome home Virgil!

 

[5.0 Junkie]

Will a "P&G" checker not work? I know lots of sportsman classes outside of NHRA have compression ratio rules. You basically screw it in a plug hole and turn the engine over. It just measures the volume differences at BDC and TDC. If NHRA doesn't have people with basic math skills enough to figure out compression ratio, I feel bad.

 

[DG]

Will a "P&G" checker not work? I know lots of sportsman classes outside of NHRA have compression ratio rules. You basically screw it in a plug hole and turn the engine over. It just measures the volume differences at BDC and TDC. If NHRA doesn't have people with basic math skills enough to figure out compression ratio, I feel bad.

The "Pump" was originally for just determining cubic inches. The real devious Sportman racers figured out how to fool a "Engine Pump" long ago.

It is used to get some handle on really big differences between claimed CI and actual CI, but he tech team still requires that the cylinder head gets pulled to allow "true" measurement.

 

[Toejam]

Just another point of view:

When DA ran his tests, the fuel pumps were 20 - 30 gpm smaller, ignition timing profiles were in their enfancy if used at all, superchargers and injectors were archaic compared to today's. And he said only one car ran quicker than the low compression car on that day and it wasn't by much, so why would it slow down today's cars by 2 - 3 tenths?

I would say 90% of the teams have the piston, rod, head gasket combo to run the 6:1 compression and the pullies to run the blower overdrive specified. It would be an easy deal to get the right camshaft for this combination. Dell was right on when he said maintenance would be critical and the high dollar teams would have the advantage still because they could always have the newest, best parts. Even with the 50% overdrive rule, teams have old blower cases stacked up in the shop, just think what it would be like with a lower OD requirment. And just the case of choice today costs 5 grand a piece.

It could never become a "spec" motor, because the internals of a nitro motor change every run, even running them "soft" like DA calls for. Blocks vary on their deck height, used ones get shorter with age and they are usually out of square. Combustion chamber's vary in size with use, every valve job changes the cc's. Rods get compressed on some runs and elongated on others, while pistons become "sunken" in the middle. "Budget" teams service these parts and make up for the descrepencies with rod length, piston height and gasket thickness.

DA's ideas are a start, but many other things need to be implemented at the same time to get the desired results. Plus the tech team would have to grow tremendously in both personnel and knowledge, because as DA says, many things that are "outside the rules" are going on all the time at the track.

Virgil, this was also at Pre-90% rules as well right? If NHRA tried this deal at 90% those cars would be slugs out there!