Is 1000ft. any safer or better than 1320? (1 Viewer)

[Rajunz]

Sorry, but I don't want to see a watered down car running 1320 and the extra 320ft of stopping distance will only help in the event of a catastrophic incident. I was at E-Town in 2008 when Scott had his crash and the pure horror and sadness in the pits after the incident is something I hope myself or no one else ever has to see. The shortening of the distance and the numerous top end improvements that have occurred since than are a direct result of what happened that day and all have allowed the sport to continue. From 2003 thru 2008 we lost 2 fuel drivers due to top end incidents and John Force was seriously injured, since Scott's crash the safety record has improved. Are we on borrowed time, who knows, but recent results show the safety of the sport is moving in the right direction. If the drivers and owners feel safe racing at 1,000ft than I am all for it.

I agree with this post Paul. I do not want to see watered down Nitro Cars either, and I don't think many other fans do either, if they did, they would all flock to the Divisional Meets. The stands fill up at National Meets BECAUSE of the ground pounding Nitro cars.

I'm fine with how it is. I saw some of the best racing of my life at the US Nationals this year. Running to 1,000' instead of 1320' didn't change that any.

Let the teams keep innovating and run them to 1,000'. Fine with me!

I like the 1,000' just fine too, you can't see the last 320 feet of track anyways.

 

[.]

and alcohol classes running similar to pros?... so what - run them at div.
races and let the pros run the nat. events.

If this became a new rule, I suspect it would be the death of the alcohol categories.

 

[mick]

If this became a new rule, I suspect it would be the death of the alcohol categories.

i think it would dramatically decrease the number of nationally sponsored sportsmen racers, but i don't think specifically the alcohol classes would cease existence?
rest assured as long as nhra runs the show this won't happen; sportsmen
entry fees are too valuable @ nat. events.

 

[SoCal Racer]

I agree with this post Paul. I do not want to see watered down Nitro Cars either, and I don't think many other fans do either, if they did, they would all flock to the Divisional Meets. The stands fill up at National Meets BECAUSE of the ground pounding Nitro cars.

How is 4.70 @ 300 in a quarter mile NOT ground pounding? To me "watered down" would be more like NTF cars, not 4.70-4.80 @ around 300. Even at that I've been to many more nostalgia events than Big Shows since 1000 foot because NTF and NFC is exciting. In the past it would take an act of congress to keep me away from a national event, but 3/4 track racing (1000 foot) accomplished that after only one experience.

 

[Joker]

It doesnt matter if we run top fuel 1/8th mile, its still dangerous. Racing is dangerous. Always has been, always will.

 

[Rat]

Dangerous yes but any human being knows right from the start if you dont want to play with danger and a risk of injury or death then you just dont ever step into the cockpit. TF and FC are not classes to run for any driver who can't handle the risk, so there's really no point here other than yes, TF and FC have been and will always be dangerous since the first day they started running.

Why are people so afraid about taking the entertainment factor away. Common sense a 4.70 at 310 is more than ground shaking. Ground shaking is not going anywhere. I never said take away the Nitro. I'm seeing 3 types of people in this thread and it's interesting:

1. 1000 Feet supporters
2. 1320 supporters who want to return offering ideas
3. 1320 supporters who either want to return at 4.4 level or not return at all. Fan experience is not going to be altered if a car runs a 4.75 and not a 4.45

 

[SoCal Racer]

I guess I'm type #2

I’ll admit my tuning experience doesn’t include nitro, but the “1000 ft. is cheaper” or “changes would bankrupt smaller teams” arguments just don’t seem to ring true. Since the cars are being run harder than ever to get to 1320 speeds in 1000 feet, parts attrition has to be as high or higher than ever. There are some solutions that cost very little (reduce blower overdrive, nitro percentages) and some slightly more expensive (smaller mags and fuel pumps) that would get us back to safe speeds for 1320. Remember that “safe” is an illusory term when you’re talking about accelerating cars from 0 – 300+ mph in a quarter mile. There are also some much pricier fixes like lower compression ratios, smaller blowers, the 413 combo, and others that involve a lot of expensive parts. But if you save the cost of a few boxes of pistons and rods and have less catastrophic failures by running a slightly milder combination, wouldn’t that offset the initial costs? And if costs could be reduced by slightly softening up the cars while returning to 1320 wouldn’t that draw more competitors? ? I see that as a win-win vs. runaway costs that are causing car counts to dwindle.

Someone said “I highly doubt the average fan can tell a 340 mph pass from a 300 mph with out the aid of the scoreboards.” If that’s true, it’s true both ways. If they can’t tell 300 from, say 320, at 1000 feet, then what’s the problem with 300 at 1320? Thing is anyone CAN tell the difference between a full track pass and one clicked early at 1000 feet.

 

[MW]

How is 4.70 @ 300 in a quarter mile NOT ground pounding? To me "watered down" would be more like NTF cars, not 4.70-4.80 @ around 300. Even at that I've been to many more nostalgia events than Big Shows since 1000 foot because NTF and NFC is exciting. In the past it would take an act of congress to keep me away from a national event, but 3/4 track racing (1000 foot) accomplished that after only one experience.

You and I are cut from the same fabric. We attended a MINIMUM of 8 National events a year from 1983 to 2007, but seeing Indy @ 1000' was the end for me. The real problem is that the big budget teams don't want to trash all their R & D and the NHRA does'nt have the balls to stand up and return the sport to where it should be. Racing nitro is dangerous no matter how far they go, but they are pushing the cars harder than ever. I believe Mr. Hartman stated awhile back that if they toned the cars down it would bring in new blood, and some of the cars that have been parked. I could'nt agree more and feel that quite a few of the Nostalgia guys would step up if the cost to put together a car was not out of control. Either way they are going to have to slow the cars (even @ 1000'), so if new rules come into play how about setting up a package that is affordable to more than the select few. In the meantime I'll just keep hittin up the Nostalgia scene for my fix. The Hot Rod Reunion will be KILLER as always.

 

[Rat]

I guess I'm type #2

I’ll admit my tuning experience doesn’t include nitro, but the “1000 ft. is cheaper” or “changes would bankrupt smaller teams” arguments just don’t seem to ring true. Since the cars are being run harder than ever to get to 1320 speeds in 1000 feet, parts attrition has to be as high or higher than ever. There are some solutions that cost very little (reduce blower overdrive, nitro percentages) and some slightly more expensive (smaller mags and fuel pumps) that would get us back to safe speeds for 1320. Remember that “safe” is an illusory term when you’re talking about accelerating cars from 0 – 300+ mph in a quarter mile. There are also some much pricier fixes like lower compression ratios, smaller blowers, the 413 combo, and others that involve a lot of expensive parts. But if you save the cost of a few boxes of pistons and rods and have less catastrophic failures by running a slightly milder combination, wouldn’t that offset the initial costs? And if costs could be reduced by slightly softening up the cars while returning to 1320 wouldn’t that draw more competitors? ? I see that as a win-win vs. runaway costs that are causing car counts to dwindle.

Someone said “I highly doubt the average fan can tell a 340 mph pass from a 300 mph with out the aid of the scoreboards.” If that’s true, it’s true both ways. If they can’t tell 300 from, say 320, at 1000 feet, then what’s the problem with 300 at 1320? Thing is anyone CAN tell the difference between a full track pass and one clicked early at 1000 feet.

Excellent Post

 

[You!]

Simpliest fix that won't cost a team a dime...single 1 1/2" fuel line from the tank to the pump(s).

 

[Rat]

Why doesn't the NHRA at least consider and test this? Last year was just gungho on the tuneup and 413

 

[PJ]

There would be an expense but what about rear end swap. Didn't they do that back in the 90's to slow them down? I think it held them back for a few years.


I suppose the next question pertaining to safety is this. Have we reached the limit of reasonable safety expections or are temporary measures needed to delay performance until safety innovations catch up?


I think I should trademark neutered nitro just in case lol

 

[Rat]

There would be an expense but what about rear end swap. Didn't they do that back in the 90's to slow them down? I think it held them back for a few years.


I suppose the next question pertaining to safety is this. Have we reached the limit of reasonable safety expections or are temporary measures needed to delay performance until safety innovations catch up?


I think I should trademark neutered nitro just in case lol

That's a good question and I think safety is deadlocked. I don't think these cars can get safer than they are now without attacking the tuneup and or parts that power these cars which brings me to the point all along. To get back to 1320 these cars need to be changed and the change will make the cars safer as well as bringin back 1320.

Why make these cars slower for 1000 feet when we could go back to 1320 and make them slower and safety would be an added bonus. I know it's confusing, but adding an extra 320 feet and reducing these cars would be safer than it is now. NHRA did not need to let it get to this point until they started thinking about it. 2000-2007 was a waste in terms of trying to slow these cars down. I hold them responsible for not taking action to reform these cars. They left well enough alone until we lost Scott and then we started thinking, now we're back at that same performance level and NHRA is not really doing anything. 337 scared them so putting a rev limiter on a top fuel motor was the idea? Epic Fail!

 

[Just Paul]

That was Brainerd!

Brian, you are correct. The Fastest speed ever was at BIR, 337+

The national record was 336+ set at Columbus. Shoe never ran 337 anywhere else.

 

[MHayes]

I'm seeing 3 types of people in this thread and it's interesting:

1. 1000 Feet supporters
2. 1320 supporters who want to return offering ideas
3. 1320 supporters who either want to return at 4.4 level or not return at all. Fan experience is not going to be altered if a car runs a 4.75 and not a 4.45

You forgot #4 - Those people who think they know everything and that the NHRA doesn't have a clue. The problem with these people are that all they do is ***** and complain, toss out a few "back of the napkin" ideas and have no idea what it takes to run TF or FC. Oh yeah, they're great behind a keyboard though!

 

[Rat]

You forgot #4 - Those people who think they know everything and that the NHRA doesn't have a clue. The problem with these people are that all they do is ***** and complain, toss out a few "back of the napkin" ideas and have no idea what it takes to run TF or FC. Oh yeah, they're great behind a keyboard though!

I see what your trying to do and it's not gonna work. No one on this thread said they knew everything, but NHRA has been clueless on many issues until it has been to late. Also, not one person claimed they knew how to run a nitro car, but the suggestions sounds at least overwhelmingly logical.

You are 100% correct, this thread is going to accomplish nothing and change nothing, but it's nice to think the topic was explored. This is not a yay or nay 1000 vs. 1320 post, this is a thinkers post and your free to suggest that you think I or others are full of crap to yourself, but your not free to inslut or make anyone feel stupid for expressing their opinion in a peaceful manner.

 

[.]

Brian, you are correct. The Fastest speed ever was at BIR, 337+

The national record was 336+ set at Columbus. Shoe never ran 337 anywhere else.

Thanks, Paul.

 

[Rat]

Thanks, Paul.

This is the first time I saw this part of the post. I want to make it right. Tony's 336.15 was the last nationally backed 1320 speed record. Looking back at 2005 it was a very very capable season yea the points were dominated but the level of competition at 1320 was pretty stout. NHRA should of kept the cars at that performance level and starting resticting then. I believe the rev-limiter came out in 2006 and even I knew that just as almost every team did, it blew up motors, made runs weird.

 

[Muddy]

Well guys and gals, I don't think this is going to ever happen, until someone HUGE ( like PepsiCo, Coke biggest competitor ) steps up and sponsor's the IHRA. Then PepisCo makes all the events 1/4 mile drag racing in all classes and makes the pay outs for winning, pay out a bigger pile of dollar bills than the NHRA. Once the teams and the fans start flocking over to the IHRA, and it starts hurting the NHRA pocket book, then you might see a change, but until something like that happens, it will continue to be the same old song and dance. It's sad but, money talks!

Why do you think NHRA accepted nitro racing all those years ago? It wasn't because Wally had a change of heart, it was because AHRA was hurting the revenue. That's all they (NHRA) has ever understood.

 

[NitroRichFire]

Why do you think NHRA accepted nitro racing all those years ago? It wasn't because Wally had a change of heart, it was because AHRA was hurting the revenue. That's all they (NHRA) has ever understood.

Yea John, that's what I'm trying to say, it's all about > $$$