John Force's rant (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Jenn
- Start date
Joker
Nitro Member
Personally I have always thought they should have been able to pull a new car out. Its not safe. It should either be you can pull out a new car or you cant run at all. One of the other b/c your never totally sure during thrashing to get a car back together whether its completely safe or not inbetween rounds imo. I hear Dunn's arguement about its always been that way, and in other sports they dont do that, but to me drag racing is different. I also understand Force's deal about being unfair to the single car teams but there already at a disadvantage anyways. I think they should allow it just for safety reasons.
Meeks
Nitro Member
I agreed with John Medlen.....Why would it even cross your mind to run the car after everything that team has gone through?
On the other hand...I know it gets intense out there and you just want to keep going and knowing the reaction that Robert Hight had to skipping Houston..he probably wouldnt have wanted to not go for it...
On the other hand...I know it gets intense out there and you just want to keep going and knowing the reaction that Robert Hight had to skipping Houston..he probably wouldnt have wanted to not go for it...
Joker
Nitro Member
I dont believe they were going to run it, just pull up and stage and hope Head screwed up. They were just trying to get lucky and idle down the track for the win if possible.
.
Nitro Member
He's a hot head and shoots his mouth off and throws his weight around in the heat of the moment.
Always has, always will.
Leave the rule alone.
Let me add also that those guys thrashing on the car are awesome and did a frickin' incredible job putting that burnt car back together.
Awesome heart and will. Huge pat on the back to those guys!!!!
Always has, always will.
Leave the rule alone.
Let me add also that those guys thrashing on the car are awesome and did a frickin' incredible job putting that burnt car back together.
Awesome heart and will. Huge pat on the back to those guys!!!!
Last edited:
fizzle
Nitro Member
That’s a tough one. I'd be more inclined to agree with John though. I definitely see Mike Dunns point of view but think if there is enough evidence that a chassis' integrity may have been compromised to the point of not being safe, let them change it. There is no sense in essentially forcing a team to put a questionable chassis on the race track. Not that anyone would put a car that they know is not safe out there, but like John said, sometimes you just don't know how severe the damage may be. Fans pay to see 2 cars go down the track and maintaining the entertainment value is more important now than ever with the buyout. What other motorsports sanctions do or do not do shouldn't matter. There has always been someone that has done something first that didn't care what others were doing.
Just my .02
Just my .02
Didn't want this to have to be my first post, but what the heck...
Safety must be a priority, but it does compromise the integrity of drag racing if someone can just pull out another chassis and race. This totally goes against the smaller budget teams. Here is what I would propose if I were NHRA:
In RH's scenerio, NHRA now says you can pull out a back up chassis and run the next round, but you will have to forfeit the points you were awarded for the previous round win. This way, you obviously won the previous round but because of switch you will be penalized. Safety would not be compromised, you would just sacrifice some precious points. Points may not seem like a big deal at Topeka-but wait til Indy.
Safety must be a priority, but it does compromise the integrity of drag racing if someone can just pull out another chassis and race. This totally goes against the smaller budget teams. Here is what I would propose if I were NHRA:
In RH's scenerio, NHRA now says you can pull out a back up chassis and run the next round, but you will have to forfeit the points you were awarded for the previous round win. This way, you obviously won the previous round but because of switch you will be penalized. Safety would not be compromised, you would just sacrifice some precious points. Points may not seem like a big deal at Topeka-but wait til Indy.
Prestaged
Nitro Member
They didn't thrash that car to pull it to the line and just stage. I think John Medlen was the voice of reason that changed some minds. If any of the crew chiefs had had a few more minutes to think about it, they would have done the same thing (pulled the plug). It's a team effort and they worked as a team and made the right decision. Just MHO.
Jenn
Nitro Member
With that in mind, you may elimate those who wouldn't bother because they either aren't in the points or because points equals money and what's the point of spending money if you aren't going to get the points return in the chase for the championship?
That could be where you'd get the people who'd thrash for the heart and soul and not for the points.
Wes
Nitro Member
Two options...
1) Allow a backup car to be presented for tech inspection at the beginning of a race to be designated as such. IRL has done this for years. Should the need arise during an event said car can be used at any time the primary car is unable to be repaired. This would put a team with a single chassis at a disadvantage, but how many of those truly exist any longer? NHRA's priority seems to be putting on the "right" show for the spectators and TV, so this option makes sense.
2) On the other hand, if NHRA's priority is indeed safety then someone would need to grow some huevos and make a judgement call when a car smacks both walls like Robert's did today. Hit the wall like that and you're done. Period. Maybe reinstate the old break rule to always provide side-by-side elimination rounds?
Those between rounds thrashes are the stuff that made drag racing exciting...especially when the thrash paid off with a win light (the Raymond Beadle body collapse and ensuing Bernstein roof-graft comes to mind). The 75-minute rule has all but killed that unique aspect of professional drag racing. NHRA (and the "new" NHRA Pro Racing) needs to takes steps one way or the other to solve this issue.
1) Allow a backup car to be presented for tech inspection at the beginning of a race to be designated as such. IRL has done this for years. Should the need arise during an event said car can be used at any time the primary car is unable to be repaired. This would put a team with a single chassis at a disadvantage, but how many of those truly exist any longer? NHRA's priority seems to be putting on the "right" show for the spectators and TV, so this option makes sense.
2) On the other hand, if NHRA's priority is indeed safety then someone would need to grow some huevos and make a judgement call when a car smacks both walls like Robert's did today. Hit the wall like that and you're done. Period. Maybe reinstate the old break rule to always provide side-by-side elimination rounds?
Those between rounds thrashes are the stuff that made drag racing exciting...especially when the thrash paid off with a win light (the Raymond Beadle body collapse and ensuing Bernstein roof-graft comes to mind). The 75-minute rule has all but killed that unique aspect of professional drag racing. NHRA (and the "new" NHRA Pro Racing) needs to takes steps one way or the other to solve this issue.
Kenny Bonnell
Nitro Member
I like the rule as is, I don't think every team has a spare chassis in the trailer, so if you change the rule it would only benifit the better funded teams. I am a crew chief on a nostalgia funny car, if we don't feel 100% that the car is safe, we don't run it, and I make that decision. I understand that pro racing is much different then my racing, because you have to get that sponcer name out there, which Force and Robert did, just by getting the car to the burn box, it got more TV time then Head. If NHRA wants 2 cars to run for the fans, bring back the quick loser from the previous round. My feeling for the sake of safty is if any car hits a wall, even in the shut down area, that car should be disqualified, that would take the guess out of the hands of NHRA and the owners. No one would need to determine if the car is too unsafe to run then, it would be out.
Last edited:
JAG
Nitro Member
The only reason I don't like the current rule is, it allows UNSAFE cars to be raced in the professional catagories. Not every team has the integrity to stop and think first, not run the car down the track for safety reasons. If the safety factor is going out the window, take off the rev limiters, and let em fly too.
Just Paul
Nitro Member
I am taken back to Eric Medlens trip into the beach at Pomona just a few short years ago in 05. Blew it up in the lights, and Pomona is pretty short. It broke the chassis, and made a mess out of it. They got it welded up and got it to the line, and all he did was make a blip at the hit and just hoped Tony Pedregon would make a mistake. I don't think Force made as big of a deal back then as he did today.
I am as big a Robert Hight/Jimmy Prock fan as anybody, and I see it from both ways about bringing out a spare car on raceday.
Looking at the FC qualifying sheet, I am sure all but one team had a back up car of some sort in the trailer. How close to being ready to run, I don't know, but I would assume they would have enough parts to assemble an extra car given the right amount of time. I don't see it being anymore of an expense to have all the extra parts on a car, just more work to get your extra rear end, or whatever if they are attatched to the other car if they need it for the primary.
One example of the back up car being ready to run was Doug Kalitta last year at the finals. Primary car folded up, they took out the back up for the next session and and went 4.4 like nothing ever happened.
Can we really compare it to Nascar? In Nascar, if one crashes out, there are still 42 other cars still going. In this case, there had to be a bye run. Fans don't pay to see by runs, but, on the other hand-- TDR (That's drag racing).
It seems only 15-20 years ago just having a spare body was a luxary. There was more then one instance where teams had to cut off parts of a body from another team to patch up their damaged one to make next round.
Maybe times have changed to where it's ok to bring out another car during race day????
I am as big a Robert Hight/Jimmy Prock fan as anybody, and I see it from both ways about bringing out a spare car on raceday.
Looking at the FC qualifying sheet, I am sure all but one team had a back up car of some sort in the trailer. How close to being ready to run, I don't know, but I would assume they would have enough parts to assemble an extra car given the right amount of time. I don't see it being anymore of an expense to have all the extra parts on a car, just more work to get your extra rear end, or whatever if they are attatched to the other car if they need it for the primary.
One example of the back up car being ready to run was Doug Kalitta last year at the finals. Primary car folded up, they took out the back up for the next session and and went 4.4 like nothing ever happened.
Can we really compare it to Nascar? In Nascar, if one crashes out, there are still 42 other cars still going. In this case, there had to be a bye run. Fans don't pay to see by runs, but, on the other hand-- TDR (That's drag racing).
It seems only 15-20 years ago just having a spare body was a luxary. There was more then one instance where teams had to cut off parts of a body from another team to patch up their damaged one to make next round.
Maybe times have changed to where it's ok to bring out another car during race day????
d'kid
Nitro Member
Okay, Dunn's right, 40 plus years ago no one had back up cars and the "break rule" came into play, at least in 'bought in shows'... but then in the other leagues, you can't swap a motor during pit stops....
John's right... car hits both walls, it's tweaked and unsafe... and I really believe that if a 'bucks down' team needed pipes on race day because of something like happened today, JFR would loan them the pipes if asked, or The Don, or Team Torco/Lucas...
But hey, Team AAA, JFR racing, Eric (hop), Jimmy, John M, Gudio, and both GTX teams, You guys done good today....
John's right... car hits both walls, it's tweaked and unsafe... and I really believe that if a 'bucks down' team needed pipes on race day because of something like happened today, JFR would loan them the pipes if asked, or The Don, or Team Torco/Lucas...
But hey, Team AAA, JFR racing, Eric (hop), Jimmy, John M, Gudio, and both GTX teams, You guys done good today....
"Dr. Dirt"
Nitro Member
It's a double-edged sword as has been stated - quite well, I might add:
On one hand, allowing a replacement chassis to be run could benefit the team cars and the better funded. If you want to see the end result of something, look at the extremes where sufficient funding could even have another identical car (or even more) always waiting in the wings. That would put most others at an extreme disadvantage.
On the other hand, had there been a spare bare chassis available to this team today, I have every reason to believe this teamwork display we witnessed could've produced a viable competitor - one without any specific on track advantage beyond that of survivability in such a crisis. There's a good argument for both positions.
On one hand, allowing a replacement chassis to be run could benefit the team cars and the better funded. If you want to see the end result of something, look at the extremes where sufficient funding could even have another identical car (or even more) always waiting in the wings. That would put most others at an extreme disadvantage.
On the other hand, had there been a spare bare chassis available to this team today, I have every reason to believe this teamwork display we witnessed could've produced a viable competitor - one without any specific on track advantage beyond that of survivability in such a crisis. There's a good argument for both positions.
Kelly Andersen
Nitro Member
The way I see it is with the money it costs them to race they should be allowed a backup car. Jim Heads single cost the fans a chance to see a good race because Robert wasnt there. You would think nhra would change the rule since its in the best interest for them and the fans and the racers involved. I think for the millions spent they should be allowed a backup, just my opinion!!
If he was truly interested in safety, they would revert to the rule that they had in the late 70’s early 80’s. If you lost control of your car. IE crossed the centerline or hit the wall even after the finish line you were disqualified. You could only cross the centerline when you were exiting the track or to avoid someone in your lane. I watch a TF car get disqualified on a single (bye) run at the 79 US nationals for crossing the centerline.
PS Kelly this would slove the "single" issue
PS Kelly this would slove the "single" issue
