The end of drag racing. (1 Viewer)

[Whipster]

As far as sponsorship is concerned, I don't see any pulling out because they are gypped out of 320' because by that time they are nothing but a blurr anyhow. They get their TV time from the burnouts and the post-race interviews. The only thing we'll miss is one car "coming around" another car in that last 320' so a lot of races will won at the starting line. If they stay at 1000' and it becomes more cost effective, we just might have the "little guys" that only race several times a year go to more races which would raise the car count. Let's not rush to judgement yet and see how this thing works out.

 

[NHRADeuce]

Easy, common sense..
The spectator who has never seen drag racing will say "was that it?".
I've seen enough drag races to know what an 8,000 car will look like in 1,000 feet. Ever seen a fuel car in the 1/8th?
I'm sorry, it's going to look interrupted, and I think all realists know it without watching it. Like someone said before me, it'll be like playing the Superbowl on an Arena league field. None of us have seen it, but we all know how silly it will be..

Are you kidding me? You honestly believe that a spectator who has never seen drag racing is going to know the difference? How could they possibly if they have no baseline for comparison???? Even if it was someones second race, do you really think that an extra .4-.6 seconds of noise 400' away from them is going to make a difference to a casual fan?? LMAO Do you realize how ridiculous that argument sounds?

Why not look at the facts -
1. Very few tracks have grandstands at the top end
2. They cars will still be going 300+ (AJ even says the Army car is doing almost 330 mph on a perfect run)

And stop with the arena football comparison, they play with different rules it's a totally different game. But you wouldn't know that because you just KNOW you would hate it so you've never watched it. You probably didn't know that the AFL has been around for 22 years and is actually pretty successful. The teams are profitable and they have a better TV package on ESPN2 that doesn't get preempted by chinese checkers every week. They also get their important games on ABC and their playoff games on ESPN. But keep you mind closed, there is nothing out there worth your time since you already know what's good and what isn't.

 

[George.]

Are you kidding me? You honestly believe that a spectator who has never seen drag racing is going to know the difference? How could they possibly if they have no baseline for comparison???? Even if it was someones second race, do you really think that an extra .4-.6 seconds of noise 400' away from them is going to make a difference to a casual fan?? LMAO Do you realize how ridiculous that argument sounds?

Why not look at the facts -
1. Very few tracks have grandstands at the top end
2. They cars will still be going 300+ (AJ even says the Army car is doing almost 330 mph on a perfect run)

And stop with the arena football comparison, they play with different rules it's a totally different game. But you wouldn't know that because you just KNOW you would hate it so you've never watched it. You probably didn't know that the AFL has been around for 22 years and is actually pretty successful. The teams are profitable and they have a better TV package on ESPN2 that doesn't get preempted by chinese checkers every week. They also get their important games on ABC and their playoff games on ESPN. But keep you mind closed, there is nothing out there worth your time since you already know what's good and what isn't.

Why do you feel the need to get nasty?
It doesn't draw any respect.


It may be closed minded of me to say that I won't attend, but I have attended a bazillion races, and the 1000' strip isn't something that I can get excited about. Sorry.
Like I said, we can debate this point all day long. You think you have a point, and so do I. If you are happy with the NHRA reflecting "Arena" football or Astrodome Monster Truck racing status, then you are indeed correct with your analysis and everything will be great. Those shows are nice little side show moneymakers for the organizing bodies, but they only need to draw a small amount of spectators to remain viable. Each "player" or each "monster truck" doesn't need a multi million dollar budget just to attend the series..
Personally, I think the NHRA is a little above the Iowa Barnstormers or the "Grave Digger". Just drawing a comparison for arguement's sake is just plain sad in of itself, and your position of defending the comparison leaves me wondering where you expect the NHRA to be in 10 years..

I'm sure then attendance numbers may be fine for the rest of the year, and maybe OK the next, but I will venture to say that if the NHRA plans to use the 1,000' strip as the new standard, the crowds and the sponsors will become less interested and spend their racing entertainment dollar somewhere else.

I'm very confident they will go back to 1320 and design a better overall speed reduction package that concentrates on the cars, and not the track.

 

[Rexfiles]

Are you kidding me? You honestly believe that a spectator who has never seen drag racing is going to know the difference? How could they possibly if they have no baseline for comparison???? Even if it was someones second race, do you really think that an extra .4-.6 seconds of noise 400' away from them is going to make a difference to a casual fan?? LMAO Do you realize how ridiculous that argument sounds?

Why not look at the facts -
1. Very few tracks have grandstands at the top end
2. They cars will still be going 300+ (AJ even says the Army car is doing almost 330 mph on a perfect run)

And stop with the arena football comparison, they play with different rules it's a totally different game. But you wouldn't know that because you just KNOW you would hate it so you've never watched it. You probably didn't know that the AFL has been around for 22 years and is actually pretty successful. The teams are profitable and they have a better TV package on ESPN2 that doesn't get preempted by chinese checkers every week. They also get their important games on ABC and their playoff games on ESPN. But keep you mind closed, there is nothing out there worth your time since you already know what's good and what isn't.

There is a difference between a open mind and a closed one.

I think for now, The 1000' rule is good.

But AA/Dale said it won't work for long because they'll find new ways to blow them up. However for now he says it's necessary.

I had supported the 1000' decision, with restrictions.

No more overdrive, compression, etc.

Dale believes that that is what the Crew Chiefs will do, (I really do not see the tracks handling very much more at that point) but Dale knows X1,000,000 more than I do about this, so I'll say he's right.

And Troxel, Fuller, Brown, Worsham, to name a few, have expressed a desire to return to 1320 eventually if not now. They have their lives on the line too.

I don't know the answer, it becomes more confusing every day.

But for now, I still support 1000' racing, until things like Armstrong suggest can be implemented.

I will attend 1000' races, I will know then whether or not I like them.

I will not ever say I won't like it without being there=closed mind.

Enjoying what we have, and looking forward to safely returning to 1320'=open mind.

REX

 

[d'kid]

George,

First, I have seen Nitro cars on a 660 feet run and enjoyed it., I've seen and been with Alky cars on the same distance, and enjoyed it also.

Second, Dennis and the boys ('grave digger') have a budget on par with some nitro teams... and some weekends, they have trucks at a couple of different arenas. I also remember when Dennis had 6 trucks housed at the VoTech in Virginia Beach, (early 90's) always a couple race ready, the rest being prepped.
One thing for sure, Monster truck racing doesn't translate to TV any better than drag racing does. Both have to be seen in person, no matter the venue.

d'kid

 

[racer83]

[/QUOTE] If you are happy with the NHRA reflecting "Arena" football or Astrodome Monster Truck racing status, then you are indeed correct with your analysis and everything will be great. Those shows are nice little side show moneymakers for the organizing bodies, but they only need to draw a small amount of spectators to remain viable. Each "player" or each "monster truck" doesn't need a multi million dollar budget just to attend the series..
Personally, I think the NHRA is a little above the Iowa Barnstormers or the "Grave Digger". Just drawing a comparison for arguement's sake is just plain sad in of itself, and your position of defending the comparison leaves me wondering where you expect the NHRA to be in 10 years..

I'm sure then attendance numbers may be fine for the rest of the year, and maybe OK the next, but I will venture to say that if the NHRA plans to use the 1,000' strip as the new standard, the crowds and the sponsors will become less interested and spend their racing entertainment dollar somewhere else.

I'm very confident they will go back to 1320 and design a better overall speed reduction package that concentrates on the cars, and not the track.[/QUOTE]



First, I am not a big monster truck fan but if you think that they are "nice little sideshow moneymakers" you are sadly mistaken. Live Nation (a spin off of ClearChannel) Live Nation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) owns the Monster Jam series & the Grave Digger trucks among others. They reported revenue of $4.4 BILLION in 2005, Live Nation promoted or produced over 28,500 events, including music concerts, theatrical shows, specialized motor sports and other events, with total attendance exceeding 61 million.
If there wasn't money to be made they wouldn't do it ! Oh and by the way... they own IHRA so maybe it IS a good comparison just in the way it is marketed alone.


Secondly DRAG RACING is NOT changing to 1000 foot racing (atleast not yet).
TWO classes in ONE sanctioning body are going to race to 1000' because the drivers,& owners of these cars & NHRA feel it will be safer for them to do so.
Pro Stock, ProMod, Alcohol F/C & Dragster, Fuel & Pro Stock Bike, Comp, Super Stock, Stock & the Super Classes as well as the thousands of ET racers are STILL racing to 1320'.


To me saying that this is the "end of drag racing" is the same as the newscaster that reports that Nick Hogan and his friend crashed while drag racing when the truth is they were street racing.

I really wonder what all of the "sky is falling" comentors on here would have thought had they been around when Garlits showed up with his first rear engine car. Who cares if its safer its not the way we've always done it so its wrong....(sarcasm)

TK

 

[Bob]

Easy, common sense..
The spectator who has never seen drag racing will say "was that it?".
I've seen enough drag races to know what an 8,000 car will look like in 1,000 feet. Ever seen a fuel car in the 1/8th?
I'm sorry, it's going to look interrupted, and I think all realists know it without watching it. Like someone said before me, it'll be like playing the Superbowl on an Arena league field. None of us have seen it, but we all know how silly it will be..

I have seen nitro cars racing 1/8th mile events. Before I saw it the first time, I thought it'd suck. I was surprised. It didn't suck.

 

[Greg]

I guess I'm at a loss as to what the big deal is about slowing the cars down? Take a mag and a pump off, limit the over drive on the blowers, limit the amount of wing allowed, and probably greatly reduce the amount of carnage as an added benefit. Maybe even let them run 100% again. Hell it seems like eventually you could get dragsters in the high 4.80's and funny cars in the high 4.90's at around 305-310 even with those rules in play. I don't recall any of the racing in the early to mid 90's being boring at all, and if those are the et's we have to stick with then so be it. If they start getting too fast again, then implement another restriction. I know people will say "it's not that easy", ok that's not even an argument since there are only 3 things that are at the heart of any combustion engine, fuel, fire and air, restrict all 3 and you will slow the cars down no matter what. Now I don't follow Nascar at all, but didn't Bill Elliott run 212mph about 15 years ago at Talledega? Well they didn't have to shorten Talledega, they simply restricted how fast the cars were able to go.

My point is, NHRA may run out of tracks capable of hosting national events if they are strictly going to go off of the amount of shutdown available as I've heard many people demanding they do. Track owners can't magically produce a longer shutdown areas unless they are lucky enough to be able to already own, or can purchase adjacent land which you know will go for some astronomical price.

I could be wrong, but I do think anything less than 1/4 mile racing will effect the viability of the sport in the future. I mean that is the basis of the sport, even people who have never been to race or just vaguely have an understanding of it know this. When I say "the sport", I am simply referring to professional drag racing, and nothing more. Little tracks will still do well, and grass roots racing will remain intact, but as far as the NHRA, I could see where this could be a problem for them. I can tell you this, I would almost bet any amount of money that the majority of people watching the racing on TV, and attending national events are nothing more than casual fans ("hey the drags are in town, let's go watch"), they aren't like most of us here. Regardless of how flexible we may be, the general public can just as easily flip the channel or spend their dollars somewhere else if they aren't impressed with the show, and that's exactly what they will do. This is just my opinion.

 

[Jon Asher]

I thought some of the posts on this thread interesting, but some of you are somewhat unrealistic.

It is far easier to say you’re going to stop using a certain track for a national event than it is to find a suitable replacement.

National Trail Raceway was too short 15 years ago – and Norwalk is not just an adequate replacement, it’s far better in every way imaginable. With that said, Norwalk is still a bit shorter than the ideal, and there’s absolutely no room for expansion. The airport’s in the way.

Starting at the top:

Pomona is up against public roads and can’t be lengthened because of it.

Gainesville might be able to purchase additional room for shutoff at the far end, but I’m not certain of that.

Englishtown, well, we know about the trees and neighbors, so there’s no room there.

Bandimere Speedway can’t physically expand either. Neither can Las Vegas – unless you can get someone to move Interstate 15.

And there are others, of course.

It’s been said before, but it’s definitely true that most of the tracks we race on were built long before there were 330 mph speeds, so we have to deal with the race plants that are already in existence.

I disagree with Jason Thomas’s post on several grounds. I do not believe shortening the race distance to 1,000 feet will negatively impact either the TV audience or the sponsors. There is absolutely no reason to think that the sponsors would even care, much less even know about it. Secondly, asking tuners to race at 1,000 feet this week and 1,320 feet the next is just asking for more parts breakage as they try to adjust back and forth. Besides, if the 1,000 foot thing remains in effect for long the tuners will quickly build combinations specifically for that, and they won’t want to swap back and forth.

As whacko as it sounds, when I was in high school Old Bridge Speedway (I THINK that was the name of the track, so if I’m wrong please don’t flame me!) ran 1/16th of a mile drags on the main straightaway of their quarter mile stock car track. That’s, like, 330 feet, and the show was actually pretty good for its day (although before the advent of the LinLoc four big guys, two each, held the stick cars from rolling through the lights because the starting line was on the downhill portion of the exit of Turn 4!).

Regarding those of you who state people can tell the difference between 300 mph and 330 mph, I beg to differ. I know of numerous instances where fans have specifically been asked what they estimate the speed of certain runs have been, and they are NEVER close. Further, name a track that actually has spectator seating at the finish line.

From the second that NHRA mandated steel clutch cans instead of aluminum decades ago the idea of drag racing being an “unlimited” sport went out the window. Minimum weights, maximum cubic inches and everything else about today’s fuel cars shouts “performance-limiting,” but that isn’t keeping the fans away.

Regarding Doug Mackey’s post suggesting that sponsors might bolt because their on-track exposure time has been curtailed by 15-20%, are your serious? There are no fans sitting between 1,000 and 1,320 feet. No one is really “seeing” any sponsor’s name at those speeds.

Brent Friar is right about the Monster Trucks. Those things sell tickets. He’s also right about no one knowing what 1,000 foot racing is going to look like on TV because there hasn’t been any to date. And what he says about shortening to 1,000 feet being the answer to keeping good tracks and markets viable is also spot on.

Bross Holland is also right on target with his comments about televised fatalities.

George Civiletto says he’s not going to watch Denver because “It’s just not going to be good.” How can you possibly know that, George? You’re being negative without any basis for doing so. Give this a chance.

Jon Asher

 

[F-OFF]

I have seen nitro cars racing 1/8th mile events. Before I saw it the first time, I thought it'd suck. I was surprised. It didn't suck.

One time I saw two nitro cars leave hard and one started to haze the tires at the 1/8th so he clicked it and the other threw the belt at 1/8th. It kinda sucked.

 

[Mikey]

1000' drag racing is not going to make cars any safer. When those cars start up you must realize that they are one valve away from being a death trap, how far they go means nothing. The engine is still going to be a ticking time bomb, no matter if you just let them run to 60'. What happened at Englishtown was a disaster, we all agree on that, but you must realize each and every drag racer knows, even the little guys like you and me each time you strap in a car it could very well be the last time. You are never going to make it 100% safe, it just cant be done, and changing it to 1000' is a terrible decision. The problem lies deeper than that.

 

[Toejam]

IGainesville might be able to purchase additional room for shutoff at the far end, but I’m not certain of that.
Jon Asher

Jon, I've seen 300 MPH dragsters stop there no problem without chutes! A Couple of years back Von Smith in his alky FC ran 258 without a chute and made the turn off no problem! If every track was .89 mile like G-Ville we wouldn't be talking about any of this.

 

[Darryl]

I thought some of the posts on this thread interesting, but some of you are somewhat unrealistic...

It is far easier to say you’re going to stop using a certain track for a national event than it is to find a suitable replacement...1000 feet will negatively impact either the TV audience or the sponsors. There is absolutely no reason to think that the sponsors would even care, much less even know about it...

Regarding those of you who state people can tell the difference between 300 mph and 330 mph, I beg to differ. I know of numerous instances where fans have specifically been asked what they estimate the speed of certain runs have been, and they are NEVER close. Further, name a track that actually has spectator seating at the finish line.

From the second that NHRA mandated steel clutch cans instead of aluminum decades ago the idea of drag racing being an “unlimited” sport went out the window. Minimum weights, maximum cubic inches and everything else about today’s fuel cars shouts “performance-limiting,” but that isn’t keeping the fans away...

There are no fans sitting between 1,000 and 1,320 feet. No one is really “seeing” any sponsor’s name at those speeds...

George Civiletto says he’s not going to watch Denver because “It’s just not going to be good.” How can you possibly know that, George? You’re being negative without any basis for doing so. Give this a chance.

Jon Asher

THANK YOU Jon! I've been going to the drags damn near as long as you have and I've seen MANY changes over the years. This is just ONE MORE! Nothing more and nothing less. I agree with many concerning slowing the cars down but I jolly well want to see some thought go into those changes so we don't get knee jerk decisions that wind up putting racers out of business because they simply can't AFFORD some of those decisions. Ask the alky guys how much THEY saved on the last round of changes, and when you ask, don't forget to duck! The parts for this season have been purchased and at the moment there are few that could afford to throw most of that stuff away and start over, believe me, to work at all and slow these cars for good that will be the level of change.

Look at some of the current suggestions: Smaller pumps; one pump; smaller engines; single plug heads; siingle mags...none of this stuff grows on trees and no one knows if the teams could even ADAPT any of the current parts to meet those kinds of rule changes. Sorry folks. That just ain't gonna happen this year.

Now, what does that leave? Looks like it leaves 1000ft racing for the Pro Nitro cars, that's what? Do I like it? After 43 years of racing(not just watching either!) I just don't CARE! What ever the drivers feel will get them back to their friends and familys in one piece is FINE with me! This might not be what we all want but to do NOTHING would be nothing less than criminal!

 

[clwill]

Spend some time with Google Earth and look at some of these tracks. Jon is not only right, but he's being generous. None of the major venues could expand their length significantly, or not enough to make a difference (more than at most a couple hundred feet).

Looking at my home track of Pacific Raceways, it looks like the new layout -- although light years better in many ways -- might even be *shorter* than today if you consider start to sand trap. Eeek...

So think about what the "ideal" would be. You'd want something more than a mile long track: 1/4 mile to race and 3/4 to stop. The only track that, today comes close is Gainesville which looks to be about 0.9 miles start to trap.

Anybody care to guess what a MILE of land anywhere near a major population center would cost these days? And if you owned it, wouldn't you be better off doing something with it other than building a venue that's going to be filled one weekend a year (and used maybe only 50 days a year)?

And we haven't even talked about the noise and traffic issues that would make the neighbors so very happy...

The answer has to be to make the existing facilities work. I'm sure the answer lies somewhere in a combination of slowing the cars down and building sophisticated stopping systems into the facilities.

Although I think Dale's plan is super, and I support slowing them down, an out of control car going 275 is probably just about as deadly as one going 325. There have to be really good stopping systems. Ones that include better chutes, shutoff systems, sloped shutdowns, catch nets, sand traps, barriers, etc. Probably a combination of them all.

Smart guys like Dale can come up with good slow-downs, we need equally smart guys coming up with good stoppers.

 

["Dr. Dirt"]

For me it's not the 1000' decision that rocks my world. It's the trend that scares me the very most. If we, God forbid, should have another terrible accident at a 1000' race, will we then need to move to the 1/8 mile?

Will the 1000' racing surface have any positive effect on another high speed down-track Scott Kalitta-type incident? Should a driver be disabled somehow under power will the length of the track change the outcome.

This is where Dale Armstrong's ideas come into play. An extremely limited amount of catastrophic engine failure which he proved to be the result of implementing his ideas may rob ESPN of their latest exciting opening footage but it, more imortantly, may insure saving fuel racing-even at 1320' for all classes. Think of the dozens of teams who might jump back in if they could do so without needing 20 fresh bullets waiting in the wings. Expenses would be lower for all-big teams and little guys as well.

Open minds, collective thinking, proactive implementation and a little common sense could keep this sport alive with few dissentions if any.

Blast away!

 

[afx421]

thank you mr miller, ive been saying all along that god forbid if there is another tragedy, then what? 660 ft racing? these cars will still go over 300 mph even at 1,000 ft i think if scott had clicked it at 1,000 ft unfortunatly he still would not be with us today. this is not a fix imo.

 

[NHRADeuce]

Although I think Dale's plan is super, and I support slowing them down, an out of control car going 275 is probably just about as deadly as one going 325. There have to be really good stopping systems. Ones that include better chutes, shutoff systems, sloped shutdowns, catch nets, sand traps, barriers, etc. Probably a combination of them all.

Smart guys like Dale can come up with good slow-downs, we need equally smart guys coming up with good stoppers.

I couldn't agree more. Dale's plan is spot on for slowing the cars down, but that is only half the equation. I am willing to put up with 1000' until they get it sorted out. I have no doubt that a combination of slowing the cars down and improving their external means of scrubbing off speed will get us back to side-by-side 1320' racing.

 

[kd]

If you are happy with the NHRA reflecting "Arena" football or Astrodome Monster Truck racing status, then you are indeed correct with your analysis and everything will be great. Those shows are nice little side show moneymakers for the organizing bodies, but they only need to draw a small amount of spectators to remain viable. Each "player" or each "monster truck" doesn't need a multi million dollar budget just to attend the series..
Personally, I think the NHRA is a little above the Iowa Barnstormers or the "Grave Digger". Just drawing a comparison for arguement's sake is just plain sad in of itself, and your position of defending the comparison leaves me wondering where you expect the NHRA to be in 10 years..

I'm sure then attendance numbers may be fine for the rest of the year, and maybe OK the next, but I will venture to say that if the NHRA plans to use the 1,000' strip as the new standard, the crowds and the sponsors will become less interested and spend their racing entertainment dollar somewhere else.

I'm very confident they will go back to 1320 and design a better overall speed reduction package that concentrates on the cars, and not the track.

First, I am not a big monster truck fan but if you think that they are "nice little sideshow moneymakers" you are sadly mistaken. Live Nation (a spin off of ClearChannel) Live Nation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) owns the Monster Jam series & the Grave Digger trucks among others. They reported revenue of $4.4 BILLION in 2005, Live Nation promoted or produced over 28,500 events, including music concerts, theatrical shows, specialized motor sports and other events, with total attendance exceeding 61 million.
If there wasn't money to be made they wouldn't do it ! Oh and by the way... they own IHRA so maybe it IS a good comparison just in the way it is marketed alone.


Secondly DRAG RACING is NOT changing to 1000 foot racing (atleast not yet).
TWO classes in ONE sanctioning body are going to race to 1000' because the drivers,& owners of these cars & NHRA feel it will be safer for them to do so.
Pro Stock, ProMod, Alcohol F/C & Dragster, Fuel & Pro Stock Bike, Comp, Super Stock, Stock & the Super Classes as well as the thousands of ET racers are STILL racing to 1320'.


To me saying that this is the "end of drag racing" is the same as the newscaster that reports that Nick Hogan and his friend crashed while drag racing when the truth is they were street racing.

I really wonder what all of the "sky is falling" comentors on here would have thought had they been around when Garlits showed up with his first rear engine car. Who cares if its safer its not the way we've always done it so its wrong....(sarcasm)

TK[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

WICKED POST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FACTS and EVERYTHING!!!! (do ya think the 'mater is ready for THIS!)

I see the nhra having aprox. 80% of its races on 1000 ft tracks, with the SUPER tracks ie: Indy, G.ville, Vegas, etc., havin the rest.

(Todd ya know me...(!) I GOT that from some one reliable!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(NOTE; Todd has been in the racing/performance industry for over 30 years.
this man Knowles his sht.!)

HUGE P.S. "...GRAHAM our insurance underwritter (?!) is on line 3."

pps- Todds Known GRAHAM for 40 years TOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Nitrohaulic]

Can you imagine what a 1000 foot race will look like on TV?

Um, about a half a second shorter than it does now? Like Dale said about compression ratios, the smart ones will still be on top.

As far as the "end of drag racing" is concerned, if Olympic curling can survive and even grow? As long as there's nitro to be found at any price, some of us will be burning it.