Langdon 345mph (17 Viewers)

[eatmedic]

Looks like Langdon went 345!

https://racer.com/2026/05/01/langdon-goes-345mph-in-nhra-s-fastest-pass-ever-at-south-georgia

 

[J. S.]

Already being discussed in the Valdosta thread.

 

[stitcherbob]

FOX News actually had the story….nice to see them acknowledge drag racing finally.

Shawn Langdon breaks NHRA speed record with 345 mph run at South Georgia Motorsports Park

Top Fuel driver Shawn Langdon broke the NHRA speed record with a 345-mph run during qualifying at one of the series' newest tracks in South Georgia.

www.foxnews.com

 

[DragFan2]

FOX News actually had the story….nice to see them acknowledge drag racing finally.

Shawn Langdon breaks NHRA speed record with 345 mph run at South Georgia Motorsports Park

Top Fuel driver Shawn Langdon broke the NHRA speed record with a 345-mph run during qualifying at one of the series' newest tracks in South Georgia.

www.foxnews.com

Yes, it was great to see Fox News put something out there about his record run, but then Fox/FS1 is the network broadcasting NHRA races so not that big of a surprise. They did get a point wrong in the short article as they stated SGMP in Adel/Valdosta was one of two new tracks NHRA was going to race national events at this year when there are actually 4 (not so) new tracks. ;-)

 

[Butch]

It even made the AP NEWS.

 

[J. S.]

It even made the AP NEWS.

How in the world would the AP even know about this? Someone must have sent them a message about it.

 

[CS]

When they ran the big numbers in testing several people on here said "the car must be lite". What say ye now?

 

[TSK]

I wonder what the G-load on Langdon was during the run.

 

[ironpony]

I wonder what the G-load on Langdon was during the run.

G Force is the change in acceleration so 0-300 in the eight is still a lot higher than 300-345 out the back.

 

[TSK]

G Force is the change in acceleration so 0-300 in the eight is still a lot higher than 300-345 out the back.

Understood. That’s why I wondered about the load during the run.
It would be interesting to see the graph from the G-meter.

 

[twostep]

Understood. That’s why I wondered about the load during the run.
It would be interesting to see the graph from the G-meter.

Langdon ran 3.00/294 to the 660, a strong but rather commonplace numbers where G-meter won't show anything out of the ordinary. But if you compare the G's from the 660 to 1000 (51mph increase in speed) to other passes then you'll see that (comparative) big number you're wondering about. Consider this - using an accepted g-force calculator, accelerating 51mph in .72 seconds produces an average G number of 3.23 (!). Did that car have a hot back half tune or what ??? Wow.

Had the car been tuned as strong for the first half (and been able to hook) as it was for the back half we might have seen NHRA's first 3.60 flat.

 

[ironpony]

Langdon ran 3.00/294 to the 660, a strong but rather commonplace numbers where G-meter won't show anything out of the ordinary. But if you compare the G's from the 660 to 1000 (51mph increase in speed) to other passes then you'll see that (comparative) big number you're wondering about. Consider this - using an accepted g-force calculator, accelerating 51mph in .72 seconds produces an average G number of 3.23 (!). Did that car have a hot back half tune or what ??? Wow.

Had the car been tuned as strong for the first half (and been able to hook) as it was for the back half we might have seen NHRA's first 3.60 flat.

IMO someone has realized they can delay clutch lock up a millisecond, run quick to the eighth and then not hit the rev limiter before the 1000' and run faster up top. If they run too fast to the eighth they hit the rev limiter before 1000' and lose MPH. Now they will need to find the fine balance point of all the data.