Nitromater

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!


Lee Beard challenges NHRA to curb costs

1320Classifieds.net

Post your FREE classified ads today.
No Fees, No Hassle, just simple and effective Ads.


Just one more thing:

I ran the numbers for my suggested alcohol-fueled, Top Eliminator car through an online "performance" computer just to see what it would predict for this car with a Sonny Leonard 4,000 hp twin turbo motor and the results were surprisingly close to what I had guessed it might run. Lucky guess!!!

Here are the results from my input figures of 1,800 pounds, with a 4.50-second e.t. at 300 mph:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Your HP computed from your vehicle ET is 3,513.70 rear wheel HP and 3,904.12 flywheel HP.

Your HP computed from your vehicle MPH is 3,685.19 rear wheel HP and 4,094.66 flywheel HP.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

As Gene Wilder said at the beginning of Young Frankenstein:

"IT COULD WORK!!!!!!"​
 
Last edited:
Just one more thing:

I ran the numbers for my suggested alcohol-fueled, Top Eliminator car through an online computer just to see what it would predict for this car with a Sonny Leonard 4,000 hp twin turbo motor and the results were surprisingly close to what I had guessed it might run. Lucky guess!!!

Here are the results from my input figures of 1,800 pounds, with a 4.50-second e.t. at 300 mph:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Your HP computed from your vehicle ET is 3,513.70 rear wheel HP and 3,904.12 flywheel HP.

Your HP computed from your vehicle MPH is 3,685.19 rear wheel HP and 4,094.66 flywheel HP.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

As Gene Wilder said at the beginning of Young Frankenstein:

"IT COULD WORK!!!!!!"​


Damned crazy old man. Somebody had to say it. (respectful sarcasim)

Quoting Young Frankenstein to boot (btw it's pronounced fra ken schteen) LOL.

Bill, I admire the thought process and time you put in to your ideas. Heck I'll buy lunch if you ever get out of the house and come to D/FW just for the conversation.

Here is my question for the panel. Why won't the simple idea that Wayne Dupuy put up months ago work? 3/4 fuel line or determined diameter. Could be an on site issued restrictor. So easy to police a caveman could do it.

Or go issued inlet restrictor plates?

Wipe the slate clean just like when pro-comp was trashed. restart the record book and give back the whole can.

Then you run whatever you want twin Hobart 300 amp welders with twin 14-71's or single mag...
 
Thanks for the lunch offer; Yes, it's Frawnk-en-schteen! And, EYEgor.... :)

As for Wayne's idea... I assume you know what happens when you starve a nitro motor for fuel....



BAM!!!​

You'll find the blower in pieces, on the ground, and, on top of things, and in spectators' laps all through the grandstands...

Not a good plan. Lean-out, which would surely occur with the fuel supply choked off to that extent, would keep blower guys busy 24/7, just replacing the exploded ones. Sorry; that doesn't sound like anything workable to me. Wayne was obviously joking, but this isn't a joking matter.

Restrictor plates for the air intake sounds like treating the symptom but not the disease.

Instead of that, why not just cut the engine displacement down to, say, 250 cubic inches, and run them wide open? They already have restrictions on air intake size (55 square inches) as it is.... (page 234 in the '09 rulebook, BTW) for all the good it does.


All these band-aids fail to address the ancilary problems that nitro brings with it (the ones I delineated in detail in my previous post.) We'd still be stuck with ultra-expensive fuel and all the negative aspects of that: the possible carcinogenic nature of it, the increased fire danger (compared with alcohol) in engine explosions, and the poor ignition qualities (and the handling issues when a dropped cylinder allows the other cylinders on the opposite side to push the car out of the groove.)

Nope; gotta get rid of the stuff, in spite of the appealing aural aspects of it. It's just not worth it, especially when the performance of the cars would be virtually unchanged with the 750cid turbo-alky-powered, more streamlined, much lighter car.

I can't think of a single LOGICAL reason to keep using it.

T/F has grown incredibly stagnant; this would shake it up totally, and make it anybody's ball game again... a MUCH more interesting show and CHEAPER.... by leaps and bounds!!!

Now, tell me some really GOOD reasons why it won't work, beyond the incredible inertia that exists in situations like this.

Just my 2-cents...
 
Last edited:
Bill...

Not Invented or Thought of HERE...:eek:

which should just about cover every idea which isn't handed down from The Tower of Glendora


d'kid
the above was said in jest, but like all humor has a taste of truth... kinda like "I'm from the government and I'm here to help"
 
We can go back and forth for the next 40 pages on this thread. Nhra is not going to shorten the season. There are to many variables to consider at this late in the game. I would agree that shortening it would be an immediate cost savings for the racers. I honestly believe that come February there will dam near full fields in all classes. For the smaller team this may there one and only shot at winning some races and or a championship. As someone said a few pages back: Nobody is holding a gun to head and saying you have to be at all 24 races. I think Connoly proved last year that doesnt need to happen. Also mentioned several pages back: when did Nhra mandate (5) transporters per team, luxury coaches, hospitality areas etc. I think if the racers really want to cut costs they can do so by looking at the schedule, being smart on where they go and then look a little closer at the opertaion itself and start cutting costs. I think ALOT of changes could be made and money saved without sacrificing performance of the car. Just my .02.
 
Why bother with compression ratio restrictions and the resultant tear downs to enforce? Listen, Its really very simple. Single mag and a spec pump. Something that can be enforced in 5 seconds by Jim Collins driving by on his scooter.
 
I'm glad Lee Beard brought this up. His proposal may not be the one adopted, but the discussion is needed.
Perhaps the NHRA should go to a Regional format. Eight Divisions make sense if, for no other reason, end of season matchups would be easily divisible by two - two cars per pairing.
An Eastern and Western Conference could replace the "Countdown" as a way to enhance interest in the entire season. Indy would, of course, be open to all and some adjustment would have to be made to the geography as there are so few people in the Mountain West and nearby High Plains states when compared to the coasts.
In the meantime some attention needs to be paid to the rules for the cars themselves. I much prefer the Alcohol Funny Cars as their races are usually decided by "first car to the stripe." That's a personal preference. Still, we see far too many of the nitro races decided by wheelspin and explosions.
Keep the ideas coming.
Cheers,
Ed
 
Nope; gotta get rid of the stuff, in spite of the appealing aural aspects of it. It's just not worth it, especially when the performance of the cars would be virtually unchanged with the 750cid turbo-alky-powered, more streamlined, much lighter car.

I can't think of a single LOGICAL reason to keep using it.

I can't think of a practical or LOGICAL reason to drag race in the first place. :D
 
Ron; dunno about you, but drag racing is the most fun I've ever had with my clothes on.

If that's not a good reason to do it, then I don't know what would be.

Bill, in Conway, Arkansas
 
Ron; dunno about you, but drag racing is the most fun I've ever had with my clothes on.

Funny you should say it like that. When I finished my first 165mph pass, those were precisely the words I used. Even prepping and tuning the car for my daughter brings the same comment -- every time. :)
 
Ron; dunno about you, but drag racing is the most fun I've ever had with my clothes on.

If that's not a good reason to do it, then I don't know what would be.

Bill, in Conway, Arkansas
When first I saw your name attached to a post here, I knew there would be some things written that nobody else has written here (or perhaps anywhere) before you!

The Fossil has always thought both inside and outside the box. I'm happy to see my old friend jumping into this discussion. Even after all of these years, you are still the man!

Hope to see you somewhere in '09!
 
Interesting ideas Bill. Can't say you haven't been thinking about this, because obviously you have. Creative stuff, I must say.

You asked for reasons why this wouldn't work. Well, in a perfect world, it probably WOULD work. I'll admit that right here and now.

BUT!!!!

This isn't a perfect world. I'm going to offer a couple of things to think about.

If you were made emperor of Glendora and decreed that all of these changes you talked about were the new rules, you can go into every top fuel shop across the nation, back up semi-trailers load up all parts. All of them. Chassis, motors, blowers, heads, body parts, pretty much everything and haul it all to the smelter. All teams would be starting from scratch. Period.

The initial cost to teams would be high

They wouldn't be "high" Bill, they'd be insane. You even mentioned different tires. About the only things you could hang onto would be the steering wheel, and the loud pedal. everything else would be new. And yes, new. They'd essentially be starting with empty parts bins. If you stretched it out over several years of implementation, you're just giving the crew cheifs more time to figure out the new combo. See below.

Another thing you mentioned:
It will take months, maybe YEARS for them to science-out this engine /tranny setup to the degree that T/F has theirs worked out at the present time.

Bill, I really have to respectfully disagree with you here. I think you're really underestimating the abilities of the modern top fuel crew chief. I think they'd be pushing the limits VERY quickly. Turbos aren't the rocket science some imagine them to be. They've been around since GE came out with the first American versions in the mid thirties. They've been tweaked to death, both in aviation, and modern car racing. I'll bet you dollars to donuts it wouldn't take someone with the abilities of Allen Johnson or Austin Coil long at all to start maxing out this combo. Withing several weeks of the rev-limiter rule in '06, Allen Johnson tuned Tony to a new unheard of speed in Brainerd, using NHRA's own rules against them. I know, because I was there and saw that run. Heck, toward the end of the the 1000ft season this year, they were starting to bang 'em up pretty good. I was seeing quite a bit more carnage then I did at the first of the 1000ft era. One more thing. Did anyone here ever see the Mallicote Brothers' Twin turbo Barracuda run? I did, at Fremont Raceway in the summer of '71.
mallicoatbros.jpg

It was eerily silent. It was so quiet, you could hear the slicks squalling away when they did the burnout, and launched on their runs. We'd be going from one end of the spectrum to the other. But, playing devil's advocate, noise rules at many strips may take us there anyway.

It's always been like that. Throw a challenge at them, and the car builders take it and run. The only problem is, that with modern computers, what used to take months, and yes, sometimes years, through run after run, reading the plugs, looking at parts, and figuring out what went on, now can all be done in weeks.

Interesting ideas though, I'll certainly give you that, and completely in step with Lee Beard's "If you have a complaint, bring a solution with it." philosophy.

I'll tell you one thing, if they banned nitro completely, overnight, we'd see an entirely different landscape at NHRA races. And that just might be a really good thing. Or, it could turn out to be the biggest disaster ever. Once you make the rules changes, there'd be no turning back.

That's one thing for certain.

Good posts Bill!!
 
Interesting ideas Bill. Can't say you haven't been thinking about this, because obviously you have. Creative stuff, I must say.

You asked for reasons why this wouldn't work. Well, in a perfect world, it probably WOULD work. I'll admit that right here and now.

BUT!!!!

This isn't a perfect world. I'm going to offer a couple of things to think about.

If you were made emperor of Glendora and decreed that all of these changes you talked about were the new rules, you can go into every top fuel shop across the nation, back up semi-trailers load up all parts. All of them. Chassis, motors, blowers, heads, body parts, pretty much everything and haul it all to the smelter. All teams would be starting from scratch. Period.



They wouldn't be "high" Bill, they'd be insane. You even mentioned different tires. About the only things you could hang onto would be the steering wheel, and the loud pedal. everything else would be new. And yes, new. They'd essentially be starting with empty parts bins. If you stretched it out over several years of implementation, you're just giving the crew cheifs more time to figure out the new combo. See below.

Another thing you mentioned:


Bill, I really have to respectfully disagree with you here. I think you're really underestimating the abilities of the modern top fuel crew chief. I think they'd be pushing the limits VERY quickly. Turbos aren't the rocket science some imagine them to be. They've been around since GE came out with the first American versions in the mid thirties. They've been tweaked to death, both in aviation, and modern car racing. I'll bet you dollars to donuts it wouldn't take someone with the abilities of Allen Johnson or Austin Coil long at all to start maxing out this combo. Withing several weeks of the rev-limiter rule in '06, Allen Johnson tuned Tony to a new unheard of speed in Brainerd, using NHRA's own rules against them. I know, because I was there and saw that run. Heck, toward the end of the the 1000ft season this year, they were starting to bang 'em up pretty good. I was seeing quite a bit more carnage then I did at the first of the 1000ft era. One more thing. Did anyone here ever see the Mallicote Brothers' Twin turbo Barracuda run? I did, at Fremont Raceway in the summer of '71.
mallicoatbros.jpg

It was eerily silent. It was so quiet, you could hear the slicks squalling away when they did the burnout, and launched on their runs. We'd be going from one end of the spectrum to the other. But, playing devil's advocate, noise rules at many strips may take us there anyway.

It's always been like that. Throw a challenge at them, and the car builders take it and run. The only problem is, that with modern computers, what used to take months, and yes, sometimes years, through run after run, reading the plugs, looking at parts, and figuring out what went on, now can all be done in weeks.

Interesting ideas though, I'll certainly give you that, and completely in step with Lee Beard's "If you have a complaint, bring a solution with it." philosophy.

I'll tell you one thing, if they banned nitro completely, overnight, we'd see an entirely different landscape at NHRA races. And that just might be a really good thing. Or, it could turn out to be the biggest disaster ever. Once you make the rules changes, there'd be no turning back.

That's one thing for certain.

Good posts Bill!!

Bill, you have come up with some really thought provoking material here that has spawned some extremely interesting ideas. David, I like the analytical engineer approach you have taken to evaluating Bill's suggestions. Also, the east and west division idea appeals to me to cut down on travel etc. Seems almost reminiscent of way back when the pro classes also ran at the divisional races ( we old guys still refer to them as "points races") and could be much more exciting coming down the stretch than PJ's beloved countdown has proven to be. Anyway, I'm just reading and absorbing here, and kudos to all who have contributed. Somewhere in this thread alone is a solution to the problem using bits and pieces of all of the suggestions to form a real nice whole. "Round and round and round we go, but the secret sits in the center and knows". Man if Glendora would just tap in a little bit to some of the resources for knowledge on this board alone, think of the rich knowledge bank they could draw from. If only they were listening.....
 
When first I saw your name attached to a post here, I knew there would be some things written that nobody else has written here (or perhaps anywhere) before you!

The Fossil has always thought both inside and outside the box. I'm happy to see my old friend jumping into this discussion. Even after all of these years, you are still the man!

Hope to see you somewhere in '09!

Bob,

Thanks for the kind words.

I'm new to this forum, so these folks probably don't have any idea how crazy I really am...

They'll see... they'll see.. LOL!

I hope to see you in '09, too. This upcoming year HAS to be better than '08 was.... talk about a "lost" year...

Merry Christmas to you, Bob. BTW, Sheila (in FL) says hello...

Bill, in COLD, RAINY Conway, Arkansas
 
So Bill if we limit fuel volume and very obviously tune back to it, it will not work?

I guess it could work if you restricted the air intake to the point that it would be impossible for it to lean out, but IF I were crew chief, and was faced with the problem of making enough horsepower to win with a small fuel supply hose, I'd try upping the delivery pressure through that hose until it delivered the amount of fuel I needed. Might take a LOT of PSI to get the job done, but I'm sure there are prototype pumps on the shelf at Sid Waterman's shop that could ante up the required pressure. If not, he could certainly build one, given his expertise.

Then, NHRA would, of course, cry "FOUL" and start trying to police fuel pump pressures with telltale pressure gauges, and that would be just one more nightmare for Mr. Gracia's storm troopers... One that they don't need.

I'd rather see them take the wings off the cars... or, limit them to 10"-wide tires...
Or, cut engine displacement back to 250cid.... There are hundreds of ways to slow these cars down... Dial the nitro percentage back to 50-percent...

I don't remember just why we wanted to slow them down, in the first place.

But, it's a lot easier than making them go faster.... LOL!

Bill, in Conway, Arkansas
 
Bill...

Not Invented or Thought of HERE...:eek:

which should just about cover every idea which isn't handed down from The Tower of Glendora


d'kid
the above was said in jest, but like all humor has a taste of truth... kinda like "I'm from the government and I'm here to help"

More truth than poetry, Karl.

I cannot IMAGINE that NHRA would do anything but laugh at everything I have suggersted, but hey, this IS a "discussion" forum, so I am just discussing...

My ideas are far too radical for most folks to do anything but shake their head when they see them.

I know that. I'm aware of the inertia that is involved in any changes to "the program" as it stands. It's normal. People naturally resist change.

I tried without success to get support for a "worse red light" change for handicap start racing implemented on another BB, and I couldn't even get the drivers of the SLOWER CARS (who would be the most frequent beneficiaries of such a program) to agree with the viability of my suggestion, because it involved "CHANGE."

Like I said; it's the normal pattern of thinking, to resist change.

And, so it goes...
Bill, in Conway, Arkansas
 
Last edited:
Interesting ideas Bill. Can't say you haven't been thinking about this, because obviously you have. Creative stuff, I must say.


Thanks for the kind words; My ideas don't usually generate much in the way of complimentary comments... lol!

>>>>>>You asked for reasons why this wouldn't work. Well, in a perfect world, it probably WOULD work. I'll admit that right here and now.

BUT!!!!

This isn't a perfect world. I'm going to offer a couple of things to think about.

If you were made emperor of Glendora and decreed that all of these changes you talked about were the new rules, you can go into every top fuel shop across the nation, back up semi-trailers load up all parts. All of them. Chassis, motors, blowers, heads, body parts, pretty much everything and haul it all to the smelter. All teams would be starting from scratch. Period.





When I suggested an engine for this turkey (a 4,000 hp, 750 cubic inch, twin-turbocharged Hemi, or "Rat motor"-derived, all aluminum "Chevy") I thought about the possibility of re-using some of the current parts, and in that vein, I think it might be possible to use existing Hemi cylinder heads on the MOPAR alcohol motor, along with the entire ignition system, possibly, the connecting rods, and the flywheel and clutch setup in its entirity. The rear end would work nicely, and the chassis, itself, might be shortened to save weight, but would otherwise, be okay. Don't know about the wing... It would certainly not need to be as overt in its function, as the amount of horsepower to control (with regard to tire spin) would be virtually cut in half.

The kicker would be, can we get 500 pounds off this car?????

It HAS to be that light, or, it won't work.





RE: Cost factors....

>>>>>>>They wouldn't be "high" Bill, they'd be insane. You even mentioned different tires. About the only things you could hang onto would be the steering wheel, and the loud pedal. everything else would be new. And yes, new. They'd essentially be starting with empty parts bins. If you stretched it out over several years of implementation, you're just giving the crew cheifs more time to figure out the new combo. See below.
Another thing you mentioned:
Bill, I really have to respectfully disagree with you here. I think you're really underestimating the abilities of the modern top fuel crew chief. I think they'd be pushing the limits VERY quickly. Turbos aren't the rocket science some imagine them to be. They've been around since GE came out with the first American versions in the mid thirties. They've been tweaked to death, both in aviation, and modern car racing. I'll bet you dollars to donuts it wouldn't take someone with the abilities of Allen Johnson or Austin Coil long at all to start maxing out this combo. Withing several weeks of the rev-limiter rule in '06, Allen Johnson tuned Tony to a new unheard of speed in Brainerd, using NHRA's own rules against them. I know, because I was there and saw that run. Heck, toward the end of the the 1000ft season this year, they were starting to bang 'em up pretty good. I was seeing quite a bit more carnage then I did at the first of the 1000ft era. One more thing. Did anyone here ever see the Mallicote Brothers' Twin turbo Barracuda run? I did, at Fremont Raceway in the summer of '71.
mallicoatbros.jpg

It was eerily silent. It was so quiet, you could hear the slicks squalling away when they did the burnout, and launched on their runs. We'd be going from one end of the spectrum to the other. But, playing devil's advocate, noise rules at many strips may take us there anyway.
It's always been like that. Throw a challenge at them, and the car builders take it and run. The only problem is, that with modern computers, what used to take months, and yes, sometimes years, through run after run, reading the plugs, looking at parts, and figuring out what went on, now can all be done in weeks.


Well, you could be right about the crew chiefs' ability to get this bear in line in a short amount of time, but consider this, please:

ALL the information in their database has to do with a 2,300-pound car that runs high gear only, has 8,000 horsepower to deal with, has a 3.2:1 final drive ratio, X-amount of aerodynamic drag, a fuel program that is totally alien to what they'll be running (alky), the vagaries of a Roots blower, low compression ratios, restricted air intake parameters (55 sq. inches) and a virtual 7,200 rpm limit. PLus, all of that information was derived from a 500 cid engine, and a Hemi., at that.

How much of that is going to be worth ANYTHING in the face of a high compression 750 cubic inch Rat motor (which some would surely be), with two turbos, a different fuel, with a 2-speed transmission (maybe), any rear axle ratio they want, different valve events and spark advance requirements, unlimited air intake specs, a decidedly smaller wing, and lots of stuff I'm too ignorant to mention.

Witness the failure of alky-fed turbocharged engines to dominate Pro Mod in recent months (years?) Those guys who tune those cars for drivers like Jeggie aren't exactly idiots... yet, they have a lot of trouble matching the positive-displacement blower guys' performance.

That can't be because they're not trying.

I don't think that tuning one of these chassis/engine combinations will be in any way, a piece of cake. I think they would eventually "get it," and this car could be virtually as quick as a 2008 Top Fuel car.... but, we'll never know.

I appreciate that the participants here didn't laugh my idea off the board... I know it's radical, but I think that Top Fuel could be made just as fast and a whole lot cheaper, using these ideas.

Of course, it wouldn't be "Top Fuel" any more.... lol!

You could leave TAD alone, and let the A/F cars that want to, still run their combinations... no reason to change anything there; they volunteer not to run alky and a blower... it's their choice.






>>>>>>Interesting ideas though, I'll certainly give you that, and completely in step with Lee Beard's "If you have a complaint, bring a solution with it." philosophy.

I'll tell you one thing, if they banned nitro completely, overnight, we'd see an entirely different landscape at NHRA races. And that just might be a really good thing. Or, it could turn out to be the biggest disaster ever. Once you make the rules changes, there'd be no turning back.

That's one thing for certain.

Good posts Bill!!


Thanks much, for listening, and for not falling asleep during my tirade... It was way too long.

Bill
 
Last edited:
I just browsed this post this morning so forgive me if I repeat what someone else said.
I don't see how reducing national events will save anyone money. $100,000 a race is $100,000 a race if you have 6 races or 60. QUOTE]

6 X 100,000 = 600,000 vs. 60 X 100,000= 6,000,000 :)
 
I was responding to the first one - cutting six races. Well, at least you've moved on...

But your other one's just as problematic. Define the term "deserving"... Who decides? How about those who don't get it, bet they'd be happy. Maybe even lie to seem "more deserving"? And what are the criteria? Financial hardship? "Potential"? What about the actual chance for success? You just want body counts? Fields filled with a bunch of teams that are just cannon-fodder? And the sanctioning body funding teams? There's something seriously wrong with that, just on the principle..

Determined the same way as scholarships. Everyone that wants can apply. Then a board (PRO?) determines those most deserving. If they don't perform, they lose out.

You are good at being negative........are you close to Terry Jones??
 
Ways To Support Nitromater

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top