What's the latest with LD? (3 Viewers)

[Rajunz]

Sarver won in Phoenix 2001 driving for AJ. He started driving AJ's funny cars in 2000, and drove several different Firebirds before they got the Toyota body in 2002.

 

[Rat]

Sarver won in Phoenix 2001 driving for AJ. He started driving AJ's funny cars in 2000, and drove several different Firebirds before they got the Toyota body in 2002.

Not disputing that. It's amazing how far advanced (good or bad depends how you see it) these bodies have become. Whole different animal of design. This was when they still looked alittle more like cars.

 

[Rat]

nationmaster.com results


Bruce Sarver (born January 11, 1962 - died November 10, 2005) was a NHRA Top Fuel and Funny Car driver from 1996 to 2002. ... He switched to the Funny Car class in 2000 to join Foxen Canyon with Alan Johnson (the tuner) and Gary Scelzi. He opened the 2001 season with a win in Phoenix,

He may be given the credit but I swear someone was in control of that car other than Alan. I really think it was Richard Hogan. Either way AJ had a hand in it. What is more impressive is that it's not uncommon for 1 crew chief to tune more than one car, but for 1 crew chief to tune 2 cars, in different classes, during the same event? Is that a first?

--Updated----

I did some research I was correct. It's unclear if AJ ever won as a crew chief in FC. 2000 was Rob Flynn/Richard Hogan, 2001 was Richard Hogan.

 

[Rajunz]

................What is more impressive is that it's not uncommon for 1 crew chief to tune more than one car, but for 1 crew chief to tune 2 cars, in different classes, during the same event? Is that a first?.............

The cars weren't as complex back in the day, but Candies and Hughes ran both dragsters and funny cars in '72, '73 and '74. Leonard Hughes was the crew chief on both.

 

[Rat]

The cars weren't as complex back in the day, but Candies and Hughes ran both dragsters and funny cars in '72, '73 and '74. Leonard Hughes was the crew chief on both.

I mean on the outside they both run the same exact motor and it seems like an easy setup to put on both but on the inside we know you could never ever use a tf tune up to try and run a successful fc. It has to take some brillance.

 

[Just Paul]

 

[Rat]

It was a pretty good looking car, now that I think of it that photo reminds me of all the mishaps they had with the body and how it was their only one for a short while. You can kinda also see that body design for sure contributed to what we see today in the class.

 

[BF]

There's a guy on another site confirming the Dixon to JFR rumor. Says he knows a "reliable source".

 

[kegs]

I honestly believe Sarver could drive a Dragster or a Funny Car as well as anyone out there. It's too bad he struggled with everyday life.

 

[bukweet]

Back in the day....it wasn't called the "Prock Rocket" for nothing.

He can tune a T/F car. Give him a driver that can talk to him, LD, and some adjustment time and IF all this is true, there will be a Force to deal with in two professional catagories.
Great timing for the Force camp if they REALLY want to go Top Fuel racing.

 

[HEMI6point1]

There's a guy on another site confirming the Dixon to JFR rumor. Says he knows a "reliable source".

What site is this?

 

[NitroRichFire]

Samuel, could it be this place?

Larry Dixon to JFR!You heard it here first!!!!!!!!!! - Diecast CraZy

 

[HEMI6point1]

Samuel, could it be this place?

Larry Dixon to JFR!You heard it here first!!!!!!!!!! - Diecast CraZy

Well thanks for the link. I didn't know of that site so I'll check it out....

 

[NitroRichFire]

Well thanks for the link. I didn't know of that site so I'll check it out....

Samuel, I don't know if that is the site that Barry is talking about. All I did was Google "Larry Dixon to JFR" and that was the 4th link down. I have never heard of the site myself, so it could be another site that Barry is referring to.

 

[BF]

Samuel, I don't know if that is the site that Barry is talking about. All I did was Google "Larry Dixon to JFR" and that was the 4th link down. I have never heard of the site myself, so it could be another site that Barry is referring to.

That is the site. It has sections for diecast, NHRA, NASCAR, Open Wheel among others.

 

[Gordon]

I really dont know. It was just stated he has an average .022 light and it has asterisks next too it. I'm guessing that is redlights and whatever else was ruled ineligable. It's on Vincent's facebook

This is the problem I have with statistics... one can make them say whatever one wants them to say - good or bad.

I have nothing against Vincent Nobile, in fact, I love the guy, but it doesn't matter if his average reaction time is .022 if I know he's going to redlight once every 'X' times.

I'm not suggesting that statistics can't be useful - they can. But relying solely on statistics is foolhardy because it's difficult to know what "spin" the statistician put on them.

 

[camaro]

I have nothing against Vincent Nobile, in fact, I love the guy, but it doesn't matter if his average reaction time is .022 if I know he's going to redlight once every 'X' times.

QUOTE]

the thing with Vincent or pro stock in general is, although Vincent lost 5 or 6 races by red lighting, he probably won dozens of rounds (including 3 wins) squeezing the tree like he does, so is the 3 fouls worth it ??. Thats what was so amazing about Jeg is that he squeezes the tree also but rarely goes over center with the red light.

 

[Rat]

I kinda understand what he's saying, I did not do the stat your talking about here but I find it odd considering how I will do the stat. IMO a left first/get left on stat should not even include reds, usually the stat guy would use text explaining what rules they created for the stat about to be presented useful.

Sure there can be a stat about how many times a driver goes red, I personally did not look at that. I am sure it's around somewhere but I do not think the sport uses a stat like that. A redlight is something that no driver wants to do and nobody advocates going red, it's also messes up the left first stat. It's a much more useful tool for everyone (fans, racers) to see how many times a driver left first or got left on and defining the parameters of the stat disqualifying bye runs, redlights, and runs where the driver was unable to take the light. Left first should be a simple, direct 1 to 1 stat where any time a racer goes green against another drivers light, that should be the only info ever looked at.

 

[Deuce]

I kinda understand what he's saying, I did not do the stat your talking about here but I find it odd considering how I will do the stat. IMO a left first/get left on stat should not even include reds, usually the stat guy would use text explaining what rules they created for the stat about to be presented useful.

Sure there can be a stat about how many times a driver goes red, I personally did not look at that. I am sure it's around somewhere but I do not think the sport uses a stat like that. A redlight is something that no driver wants to do and nobody advocates going red, it's also messes up the left first stat. It's a much more useful tool for everyone (fans, racers) to see how many times a driver left first or got left on and defining the parameters of the stat disqualifying bye runs, redlights, and runs where the driver was unable to take the light. Left first should be a simple, direct 1 to 1 stat where any time a racer goes green against another drivers light, that should be the only info ever looked at.

IMO the "left on" stat should include the red lights. Not as a separate stat, just part of the "left on" stat.

 

[Wayne]

IMO the "left on" stat should include the red lights. Not as a separate stat, just part of the "left on" stat.

Wouldn't that be "left first"?

Nat Dragster does show # of red lights when they do the big stats issues(end of year & mid-season?) but they aren't included in the left first stat. Easy to read/understand.


Wonder what's up with Skuza, errr, Dixon!!!