Instead of just debating it....

[Nitrohaulic]

Let's see what the numbers look like

 

[Nitrohaulic]

Wow. Look. It's at 100% already!

I guess that settles that.

 

[Alan]

I'm OK with 1000' for now, but I would prefer the 1320. But I fully understand the reasoning for shortening the track in the interim, as NHRA has put it. I would rather see the shutdowns fixed at the tracks that need it, the catch net revised as Head is working on, and I say dump the rev limiters.

 

[Terry]

If I am reading everything correctly, it appears that 1000 ft. MIGHT be a temporary stopgap fix that MIGHT be superceded with other changes that MAY be implemented as they become ready to implement. That being said, although I don't think that a 1000 ft racing distance would have saved Scott, I think 320 ft less acceleration and 320 ft more shutdown is a step in the right direction. I too, love 1/4 mile racing, but those of us that race cars in the 160-170 mph range truly have no idea what 330 mph is. So I support the change because it was the wishes of at least a majority of the men and women that ride the rockets. I, too, am saddened by seeing a race car with 2 or possibly 3 memorial decals on it. Any slight reduction in spectacle brought on by shortening the distance pales in comparison to a human life.

 

[Alan]

I also think that maybe economically 1000' might save a little bit of wear on the engine damage that seems to occur at that point and beyond, unless the tuners shorten up the wicks more so. But if they stay at 1000' am I going to quit watching? No.

 

[Rajunz]

We went to the IHRA race in San Antonio and watched them run 1/8th mile. I went there thinking "This will be kind of dumbed down racing". I left there with an entirely different view on it. The E.T's took a little time to get used to, but other than that the racing was the same. Once the cars get past the grandstands it's hard to tell what's happening anyways.

Plus if it gives the teams a relief in budgets, that has to be a great thing in these economic times.

 

[PJ]

I doubt that it will be temporary

 

[Andy]

I doubt that it will be temporary

So do I.

I wouldn't mind 1320 either. I can understand the NHRA's reasoning for this though. Right now, better safe than sorry. Got to do something until the tracks step up.

If I was the sanctioning body, I'd make the tracks step up and do their part. If not, their dates go *POOF* and I'd make Pacific Raceways the example.

Something any track owner will tell you, though, is it's almost impossible to satisfy everyone. That said, safety should be the first thing on their mind. Get a proper shutdown and have something more than a concrete wall at the end of the track.

It's impossible to know if implementing the 1000' length or having a longer sand trap would've saved Kalitta. I think his chances would've been better had he run into a SAFER barrier, tire pit or something other than a wall.

Also, as I stated in my commentary, I think the racing will be better. It won't be as fast, but it will be better. Most of the problems occur past the 1000' mark. We shall see though, we shall see.

Denver just became must see TV.

 

[Alan]

It won't be as fast, but it will be better. Most of the problems occur past the 1000' mark. We shall see though, we shall see.

Denver just became must see TV.

I still gotta believe that speeds will be 300+, maybe in the 3-teens. Can anyone really tell the difference between 310 and 325?? Probably not. But the et's will take some getting used to.....3.9 second runs!!

 

[*******]

Denver just became must see TV.

That's an understatement ! The ratings should be thru the roof.

 

[sammi]

I always thought 1320 was sacrosanct. Oh well, since nobody asked me, I tell you what I think anyway.

There are some easy things you can do to slow down the fuel cars.
1) one mag
2) lose the timers on the ignition-clutch only.
3) one entry point for fuel only, preferably in the base of the supercharger manifold.
4) No overdrive on the blower. In fact, maybe consider underdriving it.
5) Limit the size of the fuel pump.
6) Reduce the air inlet area.

The motors have evolved to the point to where backing the HP potential up will only result in a much more reliable combination.

I realize I am only a keyboard crewchief, but 250 mph looks like 330 to me when I am sitting at the finish line at Pomona.

Mark

 

[paoldtimer]

That's an understatement ! The ratings should be thru the roof.

and Paul Page was just getting it!

just messing with him, I think he's doing alright.

 

[Andy]

and Paul Page was just getting it!

just messing with him, I think he's doing alright.

What NHRA broadcasts are you watching? Paul Page is AWFUL.

I swear when I was watching the Atlanta race, I would've thrown a brick in the TV if he said "history" one more time. He's like Barack Obama is with "change." Maybe Barry should proclaim, at his inauguration, "CHANGE! Barack Obama!"

He did a great job with the Kalitta tributes - but beyond that, Paul Page is awful.

Then again, Marty Reid wasn't much better.