Did some thinking and decided I needed to validate my rationales by explaining the raison d' etre for some of these radical suggetions I made.
Virgil is right; I need to enumerate a realistic and factual explanation of the impetus behind my list of 14 reasons
how and
why today's Fuel motors can be replaced with a better powerplant for a changing world.
With regard to the 800 cid alky-fired, turbocharged motor I'd suggested, here goes:
1. It doesn't blow up like a Nitro car with potentially driver-killing explosions
Nitromethane-fueled engines sometimes experience horrific explosions like the one involved in Scott Kalitta's fatal accident. Seems like the non-compressibility of fluids comes into play when the fire goes out in a cylinder, and an explosion-creating phenomenon called "hydraulic-ing" can occur. This is not a rare occurence, and when it happens, catastrophic engine failure can be the least of the problems, with the shrapnel taking no prisoners; fuel systems, steering and braking systems are likely victims, and can leave the driver helplessly riding a 300 mile-per hour, 2,200-pound ballistic missile with no working control systems. Expensive, carbon-fiber Funny Car bodies shred like cardboard under the stress of these explosions, and the bottom line is, the aftermath of such an explosion can be an insurance company's worst nightmare.
Alcolhol engines don't suffer that fate, that I am aware. Or, do they? I've never seen an alky motor explode with the ferocity of a Fuel motor.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong about that, please.
2. It doesn't burn expensive fuel that is fraught with supply problems and politics
We all are aware that nitromethane has increased in price exponentially in recent years, and the politically-based, total B.S. "shortage" of nitro that was perpetrated around the time of the Olympics was in no way beneficial to any racer ~I~ know of, and could happen again, and again, given the Draconian way NHRA seems to like to dictate policy about anything and everything, (including fuel suply) when they can.
Alcohol is cheap, easy to obtain, and not likely to become a political pawn in a supply-war among chemical companies. It would be really difficult for NHRA to affect the way alcohol is distributed in such a way that racers would be put over a barrell... no pun intended.
3.It doesn't "launch" superchargers and injector hats into the stratosphere
This is not an alcohol advantage as much as it is a turbocharger advantage. A turbocharger is not a closed system like a positive-displacement blower (Roots or screw-compressor-type), and as such, can exhaust the expanding air from an intake-system backfire through the compressor housing without the pressure buildup that occurrs with positive-displacement blowers.
Bottom line, no burst panels would be needed and no worries about airborne sharapnel injuring anyone. I think it's a safety "plus."
4. It doesn't blow up expensive, carbon-fiber F/C bodies like Fuel motors do
Funny Car pilots and owners should appreciate the money they WON'T have to spend replacing bodies that fell victim to nitro engine explosions.
5. It won't hurt drivetrain parts to the extent that Fuel motors do
Nitro motors create such humongous cylinder pressure that, when they finally got wings effective (read "BIG") enough, and tires sticky enough, to contain the torque from a 500-inch Fuel motor, drivetrain parts started taking a terrible beating from these masssive amounts of available torque. The torque produced by an 800-cid alcohol turbo motor is likely to be less than half what a 500-cid Fuel motor generates. If they use the pieces (couplers, clutches, axles, etc.) that are in use with these 8,000 horsepower Fuel motors, they'll probably NEVER break anything in the drivetrain again. They might be able to go back to a 9" Ford-style ring and pinion, but probably wouldn't. Drivetrain breakage should be nil...
6. It will slow the cars down without the kind of de-tuning that the NHRA wants
With only 3,000 hp available to move the car, it's obvious that these cars aren't going to be setting any new records, but isn't that what NHRA wants?
7. It will be an 1,800-pound car; (easier to stop)
Since the available torque will be so much less, the chassis can reflect that in two ways: lighter components can be used throughout, and since the cars won't be going as fast, maybe it would work to shorten the wheelbase up about 30", or so. A 270" car built with smaller-diameter, thinner-walled tubing (hafta be S.F.I. approved for the new motor, of course) would necessarily be lighter. I think an 1,800-pound car is a possibility. A much smaller wing could be used, too. That car, with the 3,000-hp, 800-cid, turbocharged engine on methanol, should run close to 300 mph, I'd think (in 1,320 feet.)
8. It will eliminate cookie-cutter cars for awhile, at least
Nobody is going to have a handle on this new car immediately, so some experimentation will undoubtedly take place. No two cars are likely to look much alike for awhile. HOW REFERSHING!!! NO?
9. It will add a new dimension (ingenuity in action) that we haven't seen forever
I.E. Newly designed fuel systems, streamlining and chassis design will probably be in evidence for several years after this changeover, as first one crew chief and then another discover how to make these things fly. Ingenuity will return to the race track in such a way as we haven't see it since the '70s.
10. It will eliminate thrown blower belts
Turbos only have
one moving part and no belts at all; the reliabilty factor should go way up. Throwing the belt (or, breaking one) has to be one of the most irritating ways to lose a race. Never happen with the turbo cars...
11. It will cut expenses in myriad ways
Fuel costs will plummet. Alcohol is cheap!
Between-round maintenance would be minimized and greatly simplified since turbocharged alcohol cars don't have the
voracious appetite for parts that Fuel motors do. It might be possible to do the at-the-track maintenance with 3 guys instead of 5... or 6... or whatever it takes, now.
Slicks can be smaller... and cheaper.
12. It will probably eliminate the every-round teardown that requires $$ personell.
The destructive nature of nitromethane has brought about the absolute necessity of scrutinizing and refreshing the motor after every trip down the strip. I am not sure that an alcohol motor would need that much TLC, but I could be wrong about that. The thought of 500 cubic inches producing 8,000 horsepower make an 800 cubic inch engine producing 3,000 horsepower seem almost lazy... so, maybe every-round teardowns might not be necessary.... we'll see. (No, we won't, because this is never gonna happen, but it's fun to think about.)
13. It will eliminate a lot of "up-in-smoke" runs (less "excessive" HP)
Should generate a lot fewer races wherein one or both drivers' cars overpower the track and end up with an aborted run. The amount of power available with the alky motor shouldn't make the cars as prone to blowing the tires off the car. That's a BIG plus, right there. Nobody likes to see a car lose traction and go up in smoke. Happens all too often with Fuel burners.
14. It will eliminate the necessity of running 1,000 feet (slower cars)
The slower speeds generated by the much-less-powerful engine might make it possible to return to quarter-mile racing. Not much more to say about that.
I hope these explanations "hold water" in most cases. I'm sure I missed some things, but I'm O-L-D.. Been watchin' this stuff since 1955... and it's not gettin' any better. This bunch of nonsense is an effort to save what's left.
Okay; so it doesn't go "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH"... Get over it!
Thanks for listening, particularly Virgil.
Bill
