How Fast Is Too Fast for NHRA? Goodyear Says Current Tires Won't Keep Series from 340 MPH (1 Viewer)

As noted in the article, the real limiting factor is the length of the shutdown area. Not a single track today was built with 340 mph in mind.
But, I would still like to see that number come up. Hopefully, Maple Grove has some good weather and a tight track when the Big Show makes its way there.
 
So the last couple of years the reason to not go faster was the tires. Now the 8 year old design is just fine for the speed. Who got paid off ??
 
Wasn't it a tire explosion that caused Darrell Russel's death? Didn't his wife sue Good Year because of that? If so, does anybody know the outcome?
 
Wasn't it a tire explosion that caused Darrell Russel's death? Didn't his wife sue Good Year because of that? If so, does anybody know the outcome?
Settled out of court in 2007. The documents were sealed so no details were ever released.
 
I doubt we’ll see 340 with todays restrictions. Capps and Hight went 339 before the 8500 rpm rev limiter
 
Ken, I agree with you. F/C much more aerodynamic than T/F. One thing about F/C, when you look at the numbers, always slower than T/F until past the 660', then they really start to pull. Interesting if you compare T/F with F/C. Rear engine VS front engine. Big wing on T/F VS "wing" on F/C, etc. Yet the cars MPH so close at 1000'. F/C really is a short wheelbase streamliner.
 
If it does happen, most likely they will keep us from knowing it and toss in some more rev limiter. My money says it has happened in the past.
 
I know e.t.'s are what wins races but I get more excited about big speeds. I want to see someone hit 340 and when we get to cool weather tracks here soon I would love to see Grubby/Brittany or Prock/Hight put one on the board although I know as soon as someone hits 340 even stricter rev-limiters and/or lower nitro % will happen the following Monday.
 
If it does happen, most likely they will keep us from knowing it and toss in some more rev limiter. My money says it has happened in the past.
I hate the clocks NHRA has used for years. They do not measure the true speed as the car crosses the finish line. If Height ran 339, I think it was 340 as the car crossed the finish line. Same with the 1/8 mile clocks. A few cars have run 299 at the 1/8, but I would say it was 300. I once talked with Rick Stewart when he was the chief starter and he told me the same thing.
 
I know e.t.'s are what wins races but I get more excited about big speeds. I want to see someone hit 340 and when we get to cool weather tracks here soon I would love to see Grubby/Brittany or Prock/Hight put one on the board although I know as soon as someone hits 340 even stricter rev-limiters and/or lower nitro % will happen the following Monday.
This may not be an exact quote, but Big Daddy once said E.T.'s wins races but everybody has a speedometer in thier daily driver, not E.T. clocks. Therefore people relate to the speed of a drag car instead of the E.T.
 
I hate the clocks NHRA has used for years. They do not measure the true speed as the car crosses the finish line. If Height ran 339, I think it was 340 as the car crossed the finish line. Same with the 1/8 mile clocks. A few cars have run 299 at the 1/8, but I would say it was 300. I once talked with Rick Stewart when he was the chief starter and he told me the same thing.
So Cliff are you then going to go back in time and redo who was the first to different speeds? I believe the first PSM to 200 would be the last one that comes to mind.

Stan
 
Stan, am working on an Official Cliff Morgan Time Device. Who knows? If I get if working, you might go to the drags & note the speed trap is different.... heh heh heh Warren Johnson first to 200 in P/S. But you know what I would really like to know, is who was first to 200 in a nitro car. The Greek 1960? Frank Cannon, Lions, 1963? Garlits officially ran the first NHRA 200 in 1964. Long list of folks who ran 200 before Garlits.
 
Ways To Support Nitromater

Users who are viewing this thread


Back
Top