my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
Why would another manufacture invest the $$ to develop a faster/better/safer tire, when NHRA won't let the fuel cars use them??
Nitromater
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
What they're saying in the pits about 1320 v 1000
- Thread starter Bobby Bennett
- Start date
Why would another manufacture invest the $$ to develop a faster/better/safer tire, when NHRA won't let the fuel cars use them??
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
I used to fell the same way. Instead of regulating fuel pumps, blowers, nitro percentage, or any other suggestions we've seen on here, I thought just give them less cu.in.
But after seeing how quickly the crew chiefs have recovered the speed they lost, I realized we would be dropping cu.in. every few years. Making lots of parts obsolete for the racers. Not to mention we would expect manufactures to tool up for 450 in. motors only to have to tool up for 400in. motors in a few years, then 350in. and so on.
If we set max speeds, no obsolete parts, no re-tooling, no need for faster tires, ect. And NOT facing the same problem every few years.
Larry jr.
Nitro Member
So I guess it doesn't really matter then does it.
vegasnitro
Nitro Member
I heard one Drag racing reporter tell me that Goodyear loses money on TF/FC tires, at $800 a piece I find that hard to believe!
The longer they use this tire, the less of a loss it becomes.
Prestaged
Nitro Member
First, it is silly to even care about what "they" are saying "about 1320 v (sic) 1000" in the pits. That is a no-brainer. Of course the vast majority of the racers don't want to go back to 1320. It will only cost them money to atone for an NHRA mistake and they don't give a rip about the fans, as long as there are enough of them to keep things chugging along.
Here, IMHO, is the fix for the nitro classes, as we know them today. Most of you won't like it. I don't care. Make Top Fuel what A/FD is today, with slightly more aggressive rules. Make FC what TA/FC is today, with slightly more aggressive rules. Two very different classes. Exciting and close racing.
That is all. For now!
Here, IMHO, is the fix for the nitro classes, as we know them today. Most of you won't like it. I don't care. Make Top Fuel what A/FD is today, with slightly more aggressive rules. Make FC what TA/FC is today, with slightly more aggressive rules. Two very different classes. Exciting and close racing.
That is all. For now!
Prestaged
Nitro Member
The longer they use the tire, the more of a loss it becomes. Basic math.
No, the losses include R&D. Most products are initially sold at a loss. They make $ on each item sold over what it cost to produce that one item. Eventually, if enough are sold, they recoup the R&D cost as well.
A tire that changes every year will not have a long enough shelf life for them to be pure profit.
Larry jr.
Nitro Member
So how many rear tires do you think are used at a given NHRA race.
90-percent
Nitro Member
I don't think the retooling for the parts qty's to support the entire nitro community would be any more onerous than the normal retooling as parts continually evolve. The stuff made from billet and cnc'ed could be "retooled" with mere tweaks to the cnc program, in many cases.
And most of the parts suppliers make parts for other engine types already, so I don't think the retooling is a major roadblock. The smaller pieces would just be a variant to what they already do.
I'm not an Indycar guy, but haven't they progressively lowered the max C.I. over the years to keep the racing speeds constant? I wonder what thats been like for those guys over the years?
-jim
vegasnitro
Nitro Member
Ford redesigns the F150 about every 5 years. Which F150 do you think Ford makes more money on, the first one off the line or the last one off the line 5 years later?
Now think about Goodyear Fuel tires. They have been basically the same for 4 or 5 years. I have no doubt they were initially losing money ... But at ~ $1600 per set, times all cars, times all events, you would have to think they are at or have surpassed the break even point. I would conservatively estimate 40 sets of fuel tires per NHRA event, which would equal ~$64,000 per event, times 24 events equals ~$1.536 million per year just at NHRA national events. Throw in IHRA, match races/special events, testing and they are over $2 million per year (8-10 million since the tire was introduced). Does it cost Goodyear ~$2 million per year to manufacture and support their fuel tires when all the hard work was done years ago? Also, if speeds stay where they are now (or less) they can use these tires for the foreseeable future, whether it is at the quarter or 1000ft, which would allow Goodyear to keep recouping any costs associated with the tire.
Do they use the same tire for Alcohol and/or Nostalgia? If that's the case ... Goodyear is doing OK.
yoda
Nitro Member
You hit it, Chris. The argument has always been that Goodyear MUST be losing money on making drag slicks for the nitro classes. But when you lay out the simple math of 32 cars on at least one set of tires at cost per set, the gross numbers easily prove that SOMEONE is making a decent amount of coin just selling tires to a "niche" consumer. Now, equate in the outside (read: not counted) teams around the world that are also on the same compound (I'm in Australia now and there are quite a few teams here using the GY tire), as well as IHRA and the other fast cars on nitro slicks, and the realization that, if anything, most of the money is going to Goodyear (probably going into an insurance liability policy), and the "feel sad for GY losing its a$s making drag slicks argument" has a LOT less wind in its sails...
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
Not a bad idea at all. Ban the blower. No re-tooling, no obsolete parts,(well just 1) less oil downs, lower cost, more cars, no flying FC body's....
I know we all have ideas with the potential to work, and I've aired mine more than once, but here it is again: nothing sounds like blown nitro, so I say keep the blowers AND the nitro. In fact, the more the better. But slice the wing. I'm not saying lose the downforce completely, but if we incrementally drop a couple inches off the overall height and width of both front and rear wings per year in top fuel. Do the same in funny car. Slice a bit off the rear wing and move the overhanging nose in a few inches per year (or add width to the bodies) and speeds will drop, loads on chassis and tires as well as engines will be reduced. I know someone will chime in and quote some crew chief or some aero engineer who says the cars won't run with any less downforce than they have now, and I say horse-crap. Ever see these things run at Denver? Ever see funny cars run 25 years ago? Make the cars look "right" again and they will be safer, more easily associated with the production cars in the parking lots and less expensive. Or we could just keep doing what we've done, watching the fan base drop and the sponsor dollars needed to run a $5,000,000+ pro team disappear and wonder why.
Just limit the blower size and speed. Less air reduces the amount of fuel you can burn. Or as an alternative limit the volume of the fuel pump.
And announce that when the average speed at any national event exceeds the maximun allowable the blower speed (or size) will be reduced by some number at all future events.
And announce that when the average speed at any national event exceeds the maximun allowable the blower speed (or size) will be reduced by some number at all future events.
Last edited:
FC138fan
Nitro Member
“You’d have to lower the compression ratio and slow down the blower overdrive…and there’s no way the racers would be able to circumvent it. ...you have to do both. They go hand in hand with each other. ”
-Dale Armstrong
I can't believe anyone would think no blower is a good idea. Water down the one thing top fuel has going for it above all other vehicles on the planet... the sound.
Injected nitro cars in my opinion suck when compared to top fuel.
Slowing down the blower or reducing blower volume does lower the compression. With a smaller/slower blower the racers would soon realize they can eliminate some parts such as large fuel pumps, perhaps a mag etc. Trying to increase compression to compensate for the lack of blower would result in excessive parts breakage.
I have no idea. But Chris Cook has a good breakdown of what I was aiming at.
