I never saw where they are running a slower class at a shorter distance... and can't imagine why. THREE different distances for one event. That's just strange and I hope it isn't a trend.

Um... I only see two distances. 1000' and 1/8th mile.

COMP on down is running the FULL quarter mile.:-)

Very interesting seeing two former partners in an Alcohol Funny Car each running a car in STOCK !!

38 4544 B/S Jerry Wilson, Duncan OK, '69 Nova 10.668 11.50 -0.832
58 472 D/SA Jackie Stidham, Chickasha OK, '71 Corvette 11.347 11.85 -.503

Follow me on this....

1000' nitro racing ET's mirror 1/8 mile Outlaw Pro Mods and Outlaw Fuel Altered times...we see 3.70's and 3.80's from the altereds with regularity and 4.0's from the local Pro Mod series.

Now, 1000' alky racing ET's mirror the old 1320' time we were seeing from Top Fuel and Funny Car before the switch.

That's like all the prices at the grocery store ending with the number 9. Eeeerie...and this close to Halloween.

It's too bad that TVRP couldn't have laid in the wiring to add the needed infrareds at 940' to give us some speeds this weekend.

__________________
Wes Tarkington
www.galaxywest.com

See...I missed that part. That is freakin' ridiculous.

Would you want to be responsible if some one was hurt? Too many fatalities this season already.

__________________
David Gerard

If you're talking to me I wasn't referring to shortening it as ridiculous. The fact that they're running three different distances is nuts. Sorry you didn't understand that.

Thanks for the clarification! I agree that they have too many distances for the fans to understand (660'; 1000'; 1320').

__________________
David Gerard

You know what I think should be the scariest thing about making the decision to switch to 1000 ft? The number, itself. Not 900 ft. Not 1100 ft. Not 1052 ft.

Shouldn't that tell you that it's not based on any science, whatsoever? It went from 1/4 mile to that big, fat, round number. That tells me "It's better. We just don't know if it's better enough but, we think you'll buy it for now because of the psychological aspect of the number itself, derived from our numbering system, which is based on the number of thumbs and fingers we have on each hand and, by gosh, THAT number just happens to come after 999, where the next digit starts."

When will actual science be applied to dragstrip shutdown areas?

If there was any real way to determine what the safe racing distance is at each track based on physics for the speed and weight of the fastest cars run there, each track would be raced on at a different distance. Right?

Does that mean that the REAL answer would be to determine what the worst one is, then hold them all down to that? Englishtown would set the curve for Charlotte. Does some university or consulting firm need to be brought into this, or what?

__________________
The faster you drive, the further you have to walk to get back to the road.

What happens when someone or more than one person runs off at 1000 ft and gets killed. Do you go to 900? 800? 764?

__________________
The faster you drive, the further you have to walk to get back to the road.

Logically, 990' should be used, if we are using parts of miles for ET traps.

Early on, some tracks were 990' and others 1000'.

Usually, you were lucky to get any down track increments at all.

__________________
David Gerard

That's sorta what I'm getting at. If it's going to be based on any kind of psychologically pleasing number, such as a nice fraction of a mile or a pretty round one due to our numbering system being based on tens, shouldn't it FIRST be based on something scientific, THEN rounded down to the otherwise pleasing number? I think they're just pulling numbers out of their a$$?

I think the only reason they're going to 1000 is that it's the last increment on time slips so, the timers are already set up for it. If that last increment happened to be 1100 or 900, I believe you'd be seeing 1100 or 900 ft racing, out of nothing more than the same convenience. The "safer" racing distance would be based on no more than that, which is what I think 1000 is now.

I'm sure it would be a very complicated task for engineers to compare the shutdown areas of every track, then come up with numbers based on current funny car and dragster chassis designs. I bet for each track they could say "The chances of getting killed change dramatically once you pass this number at this track."

Shouldn't someone be working on that NOW? Until that's done and it's based on some kind of science, isn't it all just a guessing game? I'd be concerned of the possible liability consequences of NOT doing that. I wouldn't expect any science to be 100% accurate but, at least you could stand up in court and say you made every effort possible.

I wouldn't have a problem if fuel classes were run on 1/8 mile. If people in the stands did question it, others could say "They used to be run on 1/4 like everyone else but, they got too fast for the tracks. Those cars are THAT BAD!" The diehard fans wouldn't like it but, they're not the ones dying.

__________________
The faster you drive, the further you have to walk to get back to the road.

Some great racing at Noble this year! Couldn't have asked for better weather... cool temps and cloudless blue skies! I managed to put a few more faces to names and was happy to see some others again.

Bob Orme, Jenn... nice to meet y'all.
Nancy... good to see you again, hope you get the car back together soon.
Lynn... hope you didn't get lost on the way to the hotel.
Unk... it's DEFINITELY my turn next time!

Oh yeah, a big thanks to Super Stock racer James Lee for delivering a set of injectors to Tulsa for me.

__________________
http://tinyurl.com/5uz3lt

Nice to meet you too! The weather was definately better than the last time we were there.

I never did get around to going to meet Nancy. Maybe next time!