1000' or 1320' for 2009

Visit my page on Youtube · #16 09-15-2008, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christopher L Williams

Read the last paragraph?

Oops, totally glanced over that part.

#17 09-15-2008, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Okeefe

I think the parts are cheap. (relatively) I think it's the testing that would be required to dial-in a new tuneup that would be expensive.

I could be dead wrong though.

I'm going to assume that the the new combo would be more durable? If so, this would give more safety and lower operating cost.

#18 09-15-2008, 10:51 PM

we need 1320 back! i love how some people said 1,000 ft would make it more competitive. howd that work out huh ?????? $humacher hasnt lost and wont loose again under the 1,000ft scam . either tony p or beckman will win f/c , but pro stock still running 1320 ft is still very competitive.

#19 09-16-2008, 01:40 AM

This should be interesting!

::: Drag Racing Online ::: Columns - Agent 1277 - 9/15/2008

#20 09-16-2008, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Sapienza

Well if they take a vote, I'ld vote 1,000'. I like seeing BOTH cars under power at the finish line instead of one or both coasting.

Also no more costly restrictions. Like Coil said "We're already racing to 1,000ft. " no change in set up.
jmo-Zap

I agree Paul, I'd rather see 317mph in 1000' over 305mph in 1320. That just seems wrong to step back 10 years in performance................

#21 09-16-2008, 11:09 AM

1320' period!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#22 09-16-2008, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lance Peltier

I agree Paul, I'd rather see 317mph in 1000' over 305mph in 1320. That just seems wrong to step back 10 years in performance................

I totally agree. I am really enjoying a "safe" 1000' at 315. The racing has been close and the parts attrition has been less.

#23 09-16-2008, 01:39 PM

As much as I'd love to see 1320' again, I'd rather see 312-315 at 1000' ft than 305 at 1320! Plus the oildowns are WAYY down not to mention the parts attrition!

#24 09-16-2008, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Sherwood

........I'd rather see 312-315 at 1000' ft than 305 at 1320!........

i stand corrected from my earlier post, i guess some people can make the
distinction between 315 & 305mph.

#25 09-16-2008, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Larson

i stand corrected from my earlier post, i guess some people can make the
distinction between 315 & 305mph.

You would be Correct sir!

#26 09-16-2008, 02:51 PM

I'd prefer 1320, but what I'd really prefer is SAFE racing and fewer cars blowing up parts. That where the crew chiefs and NHRA need to get their act together.

But I know that as long as no one but Alan Johnson and the Sarge win races at 1000' that we'll be back to 1320' to give the rest of the teams a chance.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search