What's new
By:
Filters

Larry Dixon in bad crash, thankfully OK. (2 Viewers)

StarLink
High Speed Internet
Available AnyWhere On Earth
Now $349

Why is the engine so far forward ? ... and I'm not talking just about the supercharger !? o_O

http://www.dragracecentral.com/DRCStory.asp?ID=296225#indextop

GNV_LDC_23.jpg
 
Last edited:
Registered member said:
I would think being dropped 30 feet out of the air slamming to the ground broke the motor mounts.
Click to expand...
uh huh , and ,

the rear motorplate and bellhousing blowback tubes failed as well ?
that's weird - thanks .. o_O .. note to self ... and too others !!!

fu3 - This ain't no joke !!
not you dw
 
Last edited:
Before Dixon's first crash in Memphis, Dixon had bent his chassis at some point in the semi final round. Before the final round, they had that thing on blocks and were using sledge hammers and come-alongs to pull it back straight. That thing was messed up before it even left the starting line, even though the team says it had nothing to do with it. :rolleyes:


As far as the motor moving, you would be amazed how little actually holds them engines in place for how much power they make. I'm not surprised one bit the motor was loose after that crash.
 
Last edited:
"Back in the day" we wanted the motor to get away from the car in the event of a crash. ( talking front engine here). One car I crewed on, the front motor mounts sat on top of the top frame rails and were held in place with hose clamps.
 
I could be wrong, but I think they still use hose clamps, Funny Cars as well.
 
I was watching an old race on YouTube and Steve Evans was talking about what holds the motor in. It amounted to little more than a hose clamp.
 
These are not simply kragen type radiator hoseclamps anymore ! - http://secure.chassisshop.com/partlist/5984/ -
http://secure.mckinneycorp.com/newmkc/Items.aspx?code=BANDCLAMP&key=cat

My issue is not with those .. it is with what really should have kept the engine attached to the chassis ! post # 67
*@Jay - ^ too answer your later statement .

@Jay - no chassis has ever been designed for the motor to exit the framerails .
.

* getting the engine away was a by-product .. a fully exposed driver was never the intent . it happened many times no doubt .
scelzi went back to FC too have this safeguard . Alexis' incident is a perfect example , in a perfect world .

Dixon didn't even chip a tooth .
Bernstein will never be the same !

- this sport has been so fortunate for so long that I'm still amazed they're allowed to even start these things .
 
Last edited:
Registered member said:
My issue is not with those .. it is with what really should have kept the engine attached to the chassis !
.
Click to expand...

That's fine and all, but given the height at which this section of the car impacted the ground from, I don't understand the surprise as to the motor coming loose from the frame rails. In fact, I was more surprised that it didn't separate entirely.
 
Kinda funny how things come full circle. Dixon is going to be driving a former Al-Anabi car in Charlotte.
 
most of the time the supercharger blows off of the manifold and flops around in it's restraints, but it still looks like the pulley got too close to the shield on the back of the rollcage....glad they mandate that titanium shield after Darrell Russell's death....
 
Registered member said:
That's fine and all, but given the height at which this section of the car impacted the ground from, I don't understand the surprise as to the motor coming loose from the frame rails. In fact, I was more surprised that it didn't separate entirely.
Click to expand...
Right on Andy ... Don't think I have seen an NHRA specification or Chassis builder incorporate a "drop test" to ensure the chassis doesn't break or motor doesn't come out. We are talking about the laws of physics. I would love for some of these other experts here to explain to me how you can account for every possible scenario and prevent failure. We learn from these and move on and pray noone is killed or seriously injured.

In this case a 2 ton vehicle had enough inertia to "fly" 30 feet into the air and then drop violently back to earth.
 
Due to the amount of twisting and moving of the chassis under the motor, the motor plate is bolted to 2 mounts on the bottom frame rail while the top 4 mounts are either saddles that are hose clamped to the top frame rail or they sit on slip tubes with a single bolt holding each of them together. When you try to solidly mount the motor in the six mounting positions you will break mounts or bend/break motor plates/mounts on every run. The blow back tubes work very well in compression but are weak in elongation which would account for the forward movement of the motor in this instance. The mounts for the blow back tubes are tabs on the frame upright and the tube has a rubber insert for the bolt to go through, again for normal movement of the motor during chassis arcing during a run.

As the front of the car arcs, the bottom frame rails are in compression and will bow in/out during the run. This leads to fatigue and chassis failure such as Larry experienced in Memphis. McKinney came up with a hosed clamped "K" member to install in all of his chassis to stop this and it works quite well. Again, it is hose clamped instead of bolting/welding it in to allow for natural movement during a run. I do not know if the chassis brand Larry crashed this time has that type of brace in it's chassis.

The accident was unfortunate and I am sure steps will be taken to prevent the same from happening in the future. But the outcome was pretty amazing with Larry able to walk away the way he did which is a testimony to the many safety items that have been added over the years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ways To Support Nitromater

Similar threads

Rajunz
Larry Dixon
2
Replies
28
Views
11K
paoldtimer
paoldtimer

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top