New NHRA Nitro 'Spec' Engine for Top Fuel and Funny Cars
- Thread starter Raconteur
- Start date
Would this combo be legal in nostalsia ?
The Don: "hey Ron-whatcha doing this weekend?"
Capps: "going to the vintage race-why?"
The Don: "want to put some laps on this bullet + tell me what you think?"
Nope. Would be an issue with Fuel Pump for sure as well as the Timing Management thing...I am sure other items as well, not to mention the body...
Bill first off, you'll never see anything weighing 1,800 lbs going under 6 seconds! Not NHRA rules anyway! Second, I'd take that bet, that people don't care about the "Sound" as you say! I bet if NHRA passed out surveys or ran one on the inernet I bet the NOISE RUSH would score very high! Try watching a Drag race on TV with the sound down and see if that doesn't get boring as hell! I bet the Noise Rush of the Fuel cars brings more fans to the track than 300 MPH does, but that's just my opinion.
MM
Nitro Member
Would this combo be legal in nostalsia ?
The Don: "hey Ron-whatcha doing this weekend?"
Capps: "going to the vintage race-why?"
The Don: "want to put some laps on this bullet + tell me what you think?"
nope....too big mag, too big blower, too much pump, management system is a no-no, too many clutch discs, etc
Bill
Nitro Member
Joe said, "Second, I'd take that bet, that people don't care about the "Sound" as you say! I bet if NHRA passed out surveys or ran one on the inernet I bet the NOISE RUSH would score very high!"
I offered no "bet." In fact, what I said was:
"Granted, "whoosh" isn't as exciting as "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH."
but drag racing isn't just about sound. Or, is it?? I love the sound of a Fuel motor, probably as much as Joe; I cup my hands around my ears to capture the sound when they run.... People with ear-plugs, I don't understand. Do I have hearing loss from this? Yes.... what's your point?"
Does that sound like I don't like the noise rush??? Did you even READ what I wrote?
What my point is, I list about fifteen bad things that nitro brings to the track, and the only real counter-argument for doing away with all that bad stuff (explosions/expense) is that the new cars wouldn't be as loud?
I love the sound of a Fuel motor as much as the next guy, but I am not sure drag racing can afford the tab it brings with it any more.
The 1800 pound car would be carrying a lot less horsepower and TORQUE than current nitro rides, and would be teched with that in mind. It wouldn't need to be built with components as strong or as heavy as current chassis's are. It probably wouldn't even need to be as long... maybe 270"?
Doesn't matter; the last thing that NHRA wants is something like this that would require some real thought and imagination on their part. The new Fuel SPEC motor is about as far as they'r going to venture, if even there...
Thanks for your comments, Joe.... I appreciate that given the breadth and scope of this board's denizens, YOU were the only one with the interest and imagination to repond to my post. Guess I should have suggested that Shirley drive the prototype; then, maybe I'd have gotten some responses... LOL!
I know it's an off-the-wall suggestion and probably never gonna fly, but Fuel racing is mired in an NHRA-dictated technological doldrum that just could kill it, with the expense issue piled on top of 1,000-for racing. Somewhere, there's an answer; this could be one of them.
I offered no "bet." In fact, what I said was:
"Granted, "whoosh" isn't as exciting as "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH."
but drag racing isn't just about sound. Or, is it?? I love the sound of a Fuel motor, probably as much as Joe; I cup my hands around my ears to capture the sound when they run.... People with ear-plugs, I don't understand. Do I have hearing loss from this? Yes.... what's your point?"
Does that sound like I don't like the noise rush??? Did you even READ what I wrote?
What my point is, I list about fifteen bad things that nitro brings to the track, and the only real counter-argument for doing away with all that bad stuff (explosions/expense) is that the new cars wouldn't be as loud?
I love the sound of a Fuel motor as much as the next guy, but I am not sure drag racing can afford the tab it brings with it any more.
The 1800 pound car would be carrying a lot less horsepower and TORQUE than current nitro rides, and would be teched with that in mind. It wouldn't need to be built with components as strong or as heavy as current chassis's are. It probably wouldn't even need to be as long... maybe 270"?
Doesn't matter; the last thing that NHRA wants is something like this that would require some real thought and imagination on their part. The new Fuel SPEC motor is about as far as they'r going to venture, if even there...
Thanks for your comments, Joe.... I appreciate that given the breadth and scope of this board's denizens, YOU were the only one with the interest and imagination to repond to my post. Guess I should have suggested that Shirley drive the prototype; then, maybe I'd have gotten some responses... LOL!
I know it's an off-the-wall suggestion and probably never gonna fly, but Fuel racing is mired in an NHRA-dictated technological doldrum that just could kill it, with the expense issue piled on top of 1,000-for racing. Somewhere, there's an answer; this could be one of them.
Last edited:
d'kid
Nitro Member
seriously Bill, you lost me at 800cid @ 1800 pounds...
Joe lost me a long time ago with a NEED for 4 second cars @ 300 mph...
A low eight to hi six second flopper (65 thru 71) was more than fine with me
a low seven to mid six AA/FD during the same time again is fine... And from a pure "show" point of view, 60's and 70's hands down... Nitro today is over to quick and isn't a 1/4 of the show... but you can't un-invent the wheel, nor can you close Pandora's now that it's been opened...
Today's Big Show IS Boring, and if it wasn't for a couple of people, I would NOT attend... And Surprise, it's HERO CREWS, and only a couple of down to earth drivers...
and here's another shock for some of you... If Top Alky pipes and flops Run Quicker than NITRO, SO WHAT...
Once upon a time it was AA/GD and AA/FD... Gas and Fuel... Not Gas and Nitro... Alky ain't Gas, which makes it Fuel... fix it really quick... ban nitro.... again. Alky cars under the lights are still a great show.... junior fuel would be injected alky pipes and flops...
okay, have I pissed every one off now... re-read and understand this; you can't un-invent the wheel, nor can you close Pandora's now that it's been opened...
believe me, I hope a 417 inch motor works with a little pump and windmill... But Leave the Alky Cars Alone...
d'kid
are we redoing the late fifties?
Joe lost me a long time ago with a NEED for 4 second cars @ 300 mph...
A low eight to hi six second flopper (65 thru 71) was more than fine with me
a low seven to mid six AA/FD during the same time again is fine... And from a pure "show" point of view, 60's and 70's hands down... Nitro today is over to quick and isn't a 1/4 of the show... but you can't un-invent the wheel, nor can you close Pandora's now that it's been opened...
Today's Big Show IS Boring, and if it wasn't for a couple of people, I would NOT attend... And Surprise, it's HERO CREWS, and only a couple of down to earth drivers...
and here's another shock for some of you... If Top Alky pipes and flops Run Quicker than NITRO, SO WHAT...
Once upon a time it was AA/GD and AA/FD... Gas and Fuel... Not Gas and Nitro... Alky ain't Gas, which makes it Fuel... fix it really quick... ban nitro.... again. Alky cars under the lights are still a great show.... junior fuel would be injected alky pipes and flops...
okay, have I pissed every one off now... re-read and understand this; you can't un-invent the wheel, nor can you close Pandora's now that it's been opened...
believe me, I hope a 417 inch motor works with a little pump and windmill... But Leave the Alky Cars Alone...
d'kid
are we redoing the late fifties?
Bill
Nitro Member
Last edited:
Bill Dedman , I love your desire for technology and innovation . Though I cannot agree with your desire to ban nitro I just can't agree with that . I hate rule restrictions a perfect class for someone like me would be an unlimited one . But I understand the need to keep costs down I just can't agree with a nitro ban .
Treeshaker
Nitro Member
Pandora's box can be nailed shut at any time.
Marketing strategies and business plans are changed every day in the real world.
In reality, who are they marketing to? Not the internet keyboard jockies. From what I gather very few attend more than a couple of national events a year just like I do. A Mater meeting at an event will draw about a dozen members, yet there are thousands of fans in attendance. The majority of the event attendees are the local populance, that doesn't really care what size motor, what gear, how many mags, or size of fuel pumps the cars have. They just want the attack on their senses that supercharged nitro powered vehicles give them. Most would rather watch the pro crews work on their cars and experience a nitro car warming up than to watch most of the classes run down the strip. When I sat in the stands at Atlanta, most of the fans around me were excited when a car went 300 mph, whether it was 300 even or 310 didn't seem to make a difference. No mentions of ets or the 1,000' distance that I heard. Talk about drivers centered around he's cute or she is hot. Nothing about skills or rts. Some talk about the sponsors.
Ban Nitro - NHRA tried it once, other associations have thought about it but tested their plan first with the people that populate their events, and everytime have found that it will not work.
I applaud NHRA for taking the initiative to try something. They have picked the perfect person and team to test their theories. I am sure there will be modifications, just like you have seen with the timing system changes already. But they are doing something, not just talking about it.
Marketing strategies and business plans are changed every day in the real world.
In reality, who are they marketing to? Not the internet keyboard jockies. From what I gather very few attend more than a couple of national events a year just like I do. A Mater meeting at an event will draw about a dozen members, yet there are thousands of fans in attendance. The majority of the event attendees are the local populance, that doesn't really care what size motor, what gear, how many mags, or size of fuel pumps the cars have. They just want the attack on their senses that supercharged nitro powered vehicles give them. Most would rather watch the pro crews work on their cars and experience a nitro car warming up than to watch most of the classes run down the strip. When I sat in the stands at Atlanta, most of the fans around me were excited when a car went 300 mph, whether it was 300 even or 310 didn't seem to make a difference. No mentions of ets or the 1,000' distance that I heard. Talk about drivers centered around he's cute or she is hot. Nothing about skills or rts. Some talk about the sponsors.
Ban Nitro - NHRA tried it once, other associations have thought about it but tested their plan first with the people that populate their events, and everytime have found that it will not work.
I applaud NHRA for taking the initiative to try something. They have picked the perfect person and team to test their theories. I am sure there will be modifications, just like you have seen with the timing system changes already. But they are doing something, not just talking about it.
clwill
Nitro Member
Completely agree. I've said it here more than once: the percentage of people who come to a race who really understand what's going on is probably under 10%. Drag racing is for most a sight, sound, and smell experience, not a technical or intellectual pursuit. While passions here are strong, and detailed, NHRA is right to not market to the <1500 of us.
Tim5636sc
Nitro Member
Yes what he said.
So today i have quoted Bill Sweeney and Big Mac. I wonder if they are having lunch today?
d'kid
Nitro Member
which is why they've basically lost me... sure, they will get my 70 bucks a year to listen to the audio cast... and i'll be at one race, not to watch most of the pro cars go down the track, just a couple... but i do enjoy watching sportsmen run... learned a long time ago, i'm not the target market, heck, there isn't anything in the member's packet that i use... grew up in so cal, i've never been to pomona... heck, the most important races of the year to me were Bakersfield Fuel and Gas, The PDA meet, AHRA Grand American, and the Div 7 points meets.
d'kid
The following is some information from a very reliable source on the situation...Take this information how you want to...
I'm getting feedback from a number of prominent racers that A) They want no part of this particular engine combination because it will obsolete thousands of dollars worth of their existing equipment, B) They don't think it will produce the results NHRA wants and, most importantly, C) There are more than a handful of name drivers who do not want to return to full quarter mile racing for various other safety reasons (such as tracks like Pomona being too short and impossible to change -- and there are others, like Englishtown, Bandimere, etc.).
NHRA management also had some conversations with highly respected engine builders/aftermarket manufacturers about assisting on this program, but in typical fashion, someone from NHRA then called these people and instead of seeking their input as had been promised them by senior management, they were simply informed that "Here's what we're doing." The people who had been asked to assist are super-pissed about being dissed this way.
I'm getting feedback from a number of prominent racers that A) They want no part of this particular engine combination because it will obsolete thousands of dollars worth of their existing equipment, B) They don't think it will produce the results NHRA wants and, most importantly, C) There are more than a handful of name drivers who do not want to return to full quarter mile racing for various other safety reasons (such as tracks like Pomona being too short and impossible to change -- and there are others, like Englishtown, Bandimere, etc.).
NHRA management also had some conversations with highly respected engine builders/aftermarket manufacturers about assisting on this program, but in typical fashion, someone from NHRA then called these people and instead of seeking their input as had been promised them by senior management, they were simply informed that "Here's what we're doing." The people who had been asked to assist are super-pissed about being dissed this way.
Nitrohelper
Nitro Member
Why would it matter what the pro members would have to say about the proposed combination?
They put rev-limiters on their cars like blind sheep, and then contined to run them long after they started to push the intake valves into the ports, backfire the blower & push the rods into the pan. Then they get a fine by NHRA, have to keep running the rev-limier
I'm glad NHRA is doing something so that maybe 95% and 1320' can both come back home.
I think that 305 MPH at night is fine.
A 295 car on a hot Sunday afternoon would have less chances of smoking the tires.
Plus the new car catchers should be at all the tracks.
They put rev-limiters on their cars like blind sheep, and then contined to run them long after they started to push the intake valves into the ports, backfire the blower & push the rods into the pan. Then they get a fine by NHRA, have to keep running the rev-limier
I'm glad NHRA is doing something so that maybe 95% and 1320' can both come back home.
I think that 305 MPH at night is fine.
A 295 car on a hot Sunday afternoon would have less chances of smoking the tires.
Plus the new car catchers should be at all the tracks.
Last edited:
Bill
Nitro Member
At the risk of boring you all to death with repetition, I'm going to ask that you once again, read this list of fourteen reasons why an 800 cubic inch multi-turbo'd alcohol "Mountain Motor" would be superior to the new "spec" Fuel motor that NHRA may be mandating in T/F and F/C.
Why am I asking this??
Because I can't imagine that you all took the time to read all of it the first time, because the response to it was so one-sided that I can't imagine that there are that many people reading this stuff that could think that the advantages of nitro (more power/more noise/better aroma/more charisma) TOTALLY TRANSCENDS all fourteen reasons why the alky changeover is better for drag racing as a whole.
One more time, in no particular order as to importance:
It doesn't blow up like a Nitro car with potentially driver-killing explosions
It doesn't burn expensive fuel that is fraught with supply problems and politics
It doesn't "launch" superchargers and injection hats into the stratosphere
It doesn't blow up expensive, carbon-fiber F/C bodies like Fuel motors do
It won't hurt drivetrain parts to the extent that Fuel motors do
It will slow the cars down without the kind of de-tuning that the NHRA wants
It will be an 1,800-pound car; (easier to stop)
It will eliminate cookie-cutter cars for awhile, at least
It will add a new dimension (ingenuity in action) that we haven't seen forever
It will eliminate thrown blower belts
It will cut expenses in myriad ways
It will probably eliminate the every-round teardown that requires $$ personell
It will eliminate a lot of "up-in-smoke" runs (less "excessive" HP)
It will eliminate the necessity of running 1,000 feet (slower cars)
All that is trumped by "WAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH"!!!!!!!!
Could be... but, can the sport afford the bill for the noise?
Virgil reminded us that NHRA tried a Fuel ban (in 1957) and it didn't work.
Well; Oldsmobile tried turbocharging (F85 Jetfire) in 1962-'63 and it didn't work, either. But look at what works now... turbocharged cars are everywhere, and have been for awhile.
NHRA had no viable alternative when they banned nitro in 1957; gasoline was their fuel of choice and it wasn't up to the task.
Since then, the technological advancements in power production have "taken up the slack," to a large extent, and while, what I'm suggestion in no way would be as fast as a Fuel car, it would be reasonably close I believe. The turbocharged, big-inch, alky motors on Sonny Leonard's dyno have seen 3,000 horsepower, and in an 1,800-pound chassis could probably run numbers in the high 4's in the quarter mile, I think.
That might just be slow enough to satisfy the insurance companies that are carping about 335mph speeds...
Thank you for your indulgence.
Bill
Why am I asking this??
Because I can't imagine that you all took the time to read all of it the first time, because the response to it was so one-sided that I can't imagine that there are that many people reading this stuff that could think that the advantages of nitro (more power/more noise/better aroma/more charisma) TOTALLY TRANSCENDS all fourteen reasons why the alky changeover is better for drag racing as a whole.
One more time, in no particular order as to importance:
It doesn't blow up like a Nitro car with potentially driver-killing explosions
It doesn't burn expensive fuel that is fraught with supply problems and politics
It doesn't "launch" superchargers and injection hats into the stratosphere
It doesn't blow up expensive, carbon-fiber F/C bodies like Fuel motors do
It won't hurt drivetrain parts to the extent that Fuel motors do
It will slow the cars down without the kind of de-tuning that the NHRA wants
It will be an 1,800-pound car; (easier to stop)
It will eliminate cookie-cutter cars for awhile, at least
It will add a new dimension (ingenuity in action) that we haven't seen forever
It will eliminate thrown blower belts
It will cut expenses in myriad ways
It will probably eliminate the every-round teardown that requires $$ personell
It will eliminate a lot of "up-in-smoke" runs (less "excessive" HP)
It will eliminate the necessity of running 1,000 feet (slower cars)
All that is trumped by "WAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH"!!!!!!!!
Could be... but, can the sport afford the bill for the noise?
Virgil reminded us that NHRA tried a Fuel ban (in 1957) and it didn't work.
Well; Oldsmobile tried turbocharging (F85 Jetfire) in 1962-'63 and it didn't work, either. But look at what works now... turbocharged cars are everywhere, and have been for awhile.
NHRA had no viable alternative when they banned nitro in 1957; gasoline was their fuel of choice and it wasn't up to the task.
Since then, the technological advancements in power production have "taken up the slack," to a large extent, and while, what I'm suggestion in no way would be as fast as a Fuel car, it would be reasonably close I believe. The turbocharged, big-inch, alky motors on Sonny Leonard's dyno have seen 3,000 horsepower, and in an 1,800-pound chassis could probably run numbers in the high 4's in the quarter mile, I think.
That might just be slow enough to satisfy the insurance companies that are carping about 335mph speeds...
Thank you for your indulgence.
Bill
Last edited:
Solid Rock
Nitro Member
The smell, sound, fury and sensory overload are what interests me.
Turbocharged cars have none of these.
This is my opinion after thoroughly reading both of your posts.
Turbocharged cars have none of these.
This is my opinion after thoroughly reading both of your posts.
clwill
Nitro Member
And that's a tradeoff all marketers have to make. Whether selling TV sets, food, cars, or whatever -- do you shoot for the top 5% who really know/understand/care, or go for the 95% who don't. Or maybe even educate them? Tough call...
But I bet they're thinking they still have you. You follow it, you type on the message boards, you spend a couple hundred a year with them. Much more than 99% of the country...
see h 3 N 0 TOO
Nitro Member
and the newbies i take to the track love it as well and thats why they want to go back
