For starters, HI to everyone! I am new to this board so if this has been covered steer me to the right place.

How does everyone feel about the NHRA going to 1000ft after Scott Kalitta's accident? I myself am a 1/4 mile bracket racer and do not like the change. I think they should pull the races from unsafe tracks - not alter the rules to accomodate them. How do the rest of you feel about it? Any comments about some of the safety suggestions and slowing down the cars?

 

An extra 320 feet woudn't have made a lick of difference in Scott's case and personally, I don't think the shorter race will change much if anything for making it safer. Yeah some tracks do need a bigger run off area with no freakin walls at the end. Maybe a series of better catch nets at the top end that'll slow the car quickly but gradually.

 

I kinda heard about this....my track is IHRA...does this mean all NHRA tracks are now 1000 feet? Even for non pro cars?

 

Top fuel funny car and dragsters far as I know.

 

My local track is NHRA sanctioned and is still 1/4 mile

 

this rule applies only to top fuel and funnycars.
really, think about how irrelevnt the "last few feet" are when the cars are going 300mph.

 

I feel they are not doing the sport any good.
They need to deal with the real problem.
For years they had problems with tire shake, the more power they make the worse it gets.
I for one, am sick and tired of seeing single passes during eliminations.
The tire manufacturers have not kept up with the changes in power.

So what's the answer, I'm not sure, but until the "where the power meets the road" catches up, they should cut back the power not the length of the track.
I like to see races every round,not singles (up in smoke or tire shake).

That's my opinion....

 

What I've heard is that the 1000ft change is just a quick fix, until they deal with "the real problem" as you put it. It was better to do that than to cancel the rest of the seaon until they put other changes into effect. R&D costs time and money. They couldn't expect the teams to do this and be ready for the next race. I fully expect them to eventually go back to 1/4 mile for FC and TF.

 

The best idea I have heard about this so far is to put a limit on the fuel pump. I'm sure there have been other good ideas put out there but most of them deal with where the cars are now, not resetting the bar.

 

i would like to see them bring those cars back down to earth. right now they are so radical and beyond my imagination they just arent interesting to me anymore. the only reason i watch nhra on tv is for the pro stock cars.

 

The 1000' runs for top fuel and funny car is better than limiting them to 1/8 mile. At 1000', they still provide enough speed and excitement for the spectators.

So far, the racers in those classes don't seem to mind. They've said that at 1000', there's less chance of mechanical failures since most of the time an engine would let go right at the top end of the track. Since they've started racing at 1000', there has been no top end failures.

I can't see them restricting any of the slower classes to 1000' since they don't travel at high enough speeds. Top Fuel and Funny car were 300+ mph in the 1/4. The next quickest is ProStock and they're still under 210 mph.

The majority of the "sportsman" racers are under 150 mph.

NASCAR slowed their cars down years ago on the super speedways by using restrictor plates. This isn't a practical application for a blown injected engine so the next best thing is to shorten the course. If they every decide to let the fuel cars run 1/4 mile again in NHRA it's hard to say. Running 1000' might not be record setting but the fans still get a thrill. The rest of us can still enjoy running 1/4 mile.

 

Its a fact that most blown nitro motors let go after the 1000 ft mark, which was a large factor in Kalitta's death. by shortening the track essentially they are trying to keep the engines from reaching the rev limiter and letting loose. the theory doesn't seem to be to slow them down or give them extra room to stop atm but to keep engine failures and the side effects of that (concussion/fireball) from making the car hard to slow down

 

forgive me if im wrong but i dont know too much about top fuel and funny cars but wouldnt they tune the car to be on the rev limiter for the shorter distance.

 

they may end up doing that but i don't know if they can get the car out of the hole fast enough without blowing off the tires. the rest of this year will be interesting

 

Tire size and diff gear ratio is fixed. They only have one choice to use. That leaves transmission gearing and they don't have what's considered a transmission. Fuel cars haven't used a transmission for about 20 years or so now. They use a multi disk clutch pack. They have one speed forward and a reverser to back up. As the clutch is released when they launch, the disks apply one at a time so all 8000HP isn't put to the tires all at once. How fast or slow the disks apply determines how well they hook up. Setting up the clutch properly for the track conditions is a tough job. Watch a car smoke the tires by the 60' mark and you know the clutches came in too fast.

Since all these variables are fixed, the only thing left to control engine rpm is distance. In 1/4 mile, if the engine is maxed out at around 10,000 rpm, it will be less at 1000'. The only way to be maxed out at 1000' would be to change the tire size or the gear ratio and they're not allowed to do that.

 

I disagree on both points, as discussed in more detail below.

Exactly. As Alan Johnson said when the 1000' race length was announced, they've been racing to 1000' for a long time, and just holding on for the last 320' and hoping. Since he hasn't lost a 1000' round yet, he obviously likes the shortened distance.
It's slowed them down at least 20 MPH, and since velocity is squared in momentum, every MPH counts. And, 320' can be a very long distance when you need that much more to stop.

At the Mile High Nationals, the first 1000' race, there were more side-by-side races than they've had for a long time (including qualifying). Since then, seem to be more cars going up in smoke (but at Reading, even the Pro Stock cars were having problems with tire shake). Tommy Johnson Jr. doesn't count - he's smoked the tires every round he's lost on those occasions when they actually qualified. . .

And, just to be clear, it's only Top Fuel Dragster and Top Fuel Funny Car that have gone to 1000'. Top Alcohol Dragster and Top Alcohol Funny Car and all the other classes still race to 1320'.

The rev limiter has been and remains 8000 RPMs.

They not only bring the clutch in gradually, they also bring the power on in steps. They are allowed timers, but not any type of feedback system. Last year at Bandimere, Rod Fuller wanted to go for the track record on Friday night, brought the power on at about 300', and the front end started to lift. He had to get out of it to avoid a blow-over, and lost his chance. Had the clutch right, though.

 

I dont mind it a bit, and in a few discussion in the past, i as a racer PREFER the shorter racetrack now...it took me awhile to adjust (3years of more consistant short track racing) growing up 1/4mile, but once i seen the light, it only makes sense with no negatives other than the few diehards stuck in their way that it's 1/4mi or nothing

They're losing 20-30mph...big whoop, it's the thunder, the constant punch in your chest the fans like to see more so than big mph numbers, i figured they'd make them change the fuel ratio and bring it down a bit in conjunction with shortening the track...much like nascars restrictor plate since engine builders/chasis builders/clutch guys have just kept raising the bar, and in any form of racing, the bar will continue to be raised until it reaches a point such as this where logic sits on the sideline watching insanity take the stage. There comes a point where there really is...too much, and with these fuel cars, they reached that point a while ago, so time to reel them in a bit to cut down on death and injury. Sorry if somebodies life is less important that your entertainment factor

 

scott was dead before he hit that wall. they were saying on moparts that the driver compartment in the car had been blow apart (the actual frame of the car)


heres a brilliant idea. lets not have nitro races at track with huge brick walls an 1/8 mile past the finish line. heck, my local 1.8 mile has over 1/4 mile of shutdown room, then a 1/8 mile of sand then a field, then trees.

thats a lot different then where they were racing at

 

The runoff area at the track I usually go to turnes into a go-kart track lol Not sure how long it is but it's good enough for a jet car to go down. They used the track in an episode of Mythbusters on the revisit of beating the speed camera I think.

 

I heard and repeated that myself. However, the only comments I've heard to date from someone in the know were from Connie being quoted (unofficially) as saying the data recorder showed the brakes being applied and ineffective. That's why the talk about protecting the brakes from oil, and why they're looking to reduce the number of engine blow-ups that are the source of the oil.

In the really early days, there were races to 1/2 and even 1 mile. 1/4 was chosen to reduce the real estate needed for a track, and to represent the majority (at the time) of the acceleration. You could argue most of the critical action takes place in the first 60' - but who wants to race to 60'? 1/8 mile seems pretty short. 1000' is a good short-term compromise.

As for the return-to-1320 efforts - I hear the fuel pump limits stuff, I would think you'd still see lean engine burn-ups as people push the envelope, but perhaps that's better than excessive fuel/air blow-ups. I've thought CID reduction would do the trick, along with other limits they already have (RPM, blower overdrive, gearing, tires, etc.). Interesting at the beginning of the season the nitro % change was supposed to reduce engine blow-ups. Whatever they come up with, you can be sure will be well thought-out, given the make-up of the team they've assigned to "solve" the problem.