Jon Asher Article

#16 02-28-2007, 08:29 AM

Rich, I agree with you, and I think you have a great program. The cool thing about drag racing is that you really can make it happen if you are smart with your dollars, look for deals on equipment, etc. Unfortunately, that pretty much only applies to sportsman racing now. It wasn't that long ago that you could take Rich's approach and apply it to a pro car, and maybe go out and win. Asher's article is really about the pro classes. Yes, we haven't had a problem having full fields, but the depth and diversity are not there like maybe 10 years ago. How many surprise winners will we really see? I am by no means a doom & gloomer, I just feel the pro classes are on a slipperier slope than ever. What happens when Kalitta or Knoll or Black decide they have had their fill and don't want to play anymore? I don't have the answers, just throwing questions out there. On a side note, I think one of the coolest trends going right now is the growing popularity of real fast bracket racing, like Top Dragster, Top Comp, Top Sportsman, etc. I think Rich is a great example, he's running a blown, 6 second dragster, I imagine having a great time and not spending zillions.

#17 02-28-2007, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy Gebhart

Quote of the day! Now there is a man with insight, and wit!! What a spindoctor, do you mind dancing around the obvious a little longer?? Good thing you were subtle in your approach, otherwise Mr. Sherwood will really get riled up.

That will ruin my day for sure!

#18 02-28-2007, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Sherwood

You sure your not referring to Jeff Burk?

Chris, I think if you looked over the past 5-6 years, the number of PS'ers has dropped a bunch!

Asher is telling it like it is. Some people don't want to hear the truth and if you re-read his article, he is not talking about limiting innovation. He is just trying to point out that expensive pieces and parts, primarily in Pro Stock, are providing miniscule gains for exhorbitant cost. This allows one or more teams to stay ahead of the rest by just enough cushion to almost guarantee victories as long as they are cutting decent lights. If limiting the amount of money spent on exotic parts keeps several more teams out there, then I agree with that. I read a quote from retired Pro Stock owner/racer George Marnell that went something like this, "I don't mind spending a million dollars (his own?) on racing and having fun, but I'm not having any fun". So he got out, and so did Mark Pawuk, and if something doesn't happen soon, then so will Jim Yates. A level playing field is all that anyone asks for, but that is a hard thing to create. I'm sure if the internet and message boards had been around back in Bob Glidden's time, the same stuff was being said, and cheating or bending the rules may have been rampant, but I think Bob G. just out-worked everyone. He had to, since he was almost always the only Ford out there and everyone knows it is usually harder & more expensive to get a Ford motor to run as good or better than most GM motors.

Anyway, Joe, you as well as Bobby Bennett are correct, the car count in Pro Stock has dropped significantly in the last 5-6 years. Maybe in just the last 2-3 years. The average (other than INDY) is in the low 20's now, and used to by in the high 20's or low 30's at many races back in 2000 or earlier. Last year and this year at Pomona & Phoenix the car counts were almost identical in all 3 Pro classes, so that's a good thing. Still precarious though. If 3-4 low budget teams decided to throw in the towel soon, then filling a 16 car field will barely happen and probably won't at some races. Pretty soon it will be just the mega-millionaires out there racing, at least at the professional level. Regular millionaires will have to get out as they won't spend their own money just to show up and hope to qualify 15th or 16th.

Just my .02c

#19 02-28-2007, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Thurow

Sorry, but that article goes against everything racing is about. The one and only point of drag racing is to get from here to there in the shortest amount of time possible. Period.

I understand your sentiment, however, the pro classes are about ADVERTISING and ROI. Period. It sucks (in a way) but the traveling NHRA circus (which I enjoy) is no longer what it once was as far as "engineer it and race to the stripe".

JMO

#20 02-28-2007, 12:16 PM

Two or three years ago during a rainy day at E-Town, A couple of us fans were keping dry at Kenny Koretsky's trailer. We asked him how much it cost to run a competive pro stock car. He did'nt hesitate, just held up 2 fingers and said "two million". That's alot of money just for the chance to qualify.

Maybe Pro Stock has run it's course and needs an overhaul. I'd like to see it more along the lines of the A/SM cars in comp. eliminator. Yup, they're expensive to build, but if NHRA sticks to it's own rules, maybe running them won't need a millionaire's budget. Just one idea - maybe you folks have others.

Right now, Pro Stock cars are just non-supercharged funny cars. And still not as entertaining as the Pro Mod cars.

#21 02-28-2007, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Rau

Maybe Pro Stock has run it's course and needs an overhaul. I'd like to see it more along the lines of the A/SM cars in comp. eliminator. Yup, they're expensive to build, but if NHRA sticks to it's own rules, maybe running them won't need a millionaire's budget. Just one idea - maybe you folks have others.

I think the cost of a state of the art super mod car exceeds the cost of a pro stock car. I know that a super mod car cost almost four times what it cost me to have my L/AA (Number 5 car in the world last year) built. I'm talking about the cost minus trannie and motor.

#22 02-28-2007, 04:07 PM

Thanks for doing that Bobby. I was going to go to DRC and dig up an example of the huge Pro Stock fields from a few years ago. In the not to distant past NHRA got lobbied heavily to increase the field size from 16 to 32. There were over 40 cars showing up from week to week and sometimes the count would be over 50. At that time a 32 car show would have had a qualifying spread of a tenth and a half to two tenths. 32 cars would have been very competitive. This whole thing has gotten really expensive, and the cost has risen by large factors over the last five years. We're redheaded step children to most sponsors and I really worry where the money is going to come from. WJ isn't the ONLY racer that won't run out of their own pockets!

#23 02-28-2007, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Thurow

Sorry, but that article goes against everything racing is about. The one and only point of drag racing is to get from here to there in the shortest amount of time possible. Period. It's not close competition, it's not keeping it cheap enough for anyone who feels like it to compete. I just don't see all the gloom & doom people like Asher talk about. We've got more than full fields in all classes- what more do you want? Racing, especially drag racing, should be an engineering contest. You want artificial, spec car racing, go watch NASCAR. And by the way, how are their ridiculously restrictive rules working to keep things cheap? Not allowing progress like OHC, 3 plug heads, multispeed blowers, screw blowers in nitro classes, etc. shows that drag racing has lost its way. It should be run what you brung, & hope you brung enough. That's real racing. Unfortunately, some people have to always stand in the way of progress, and that's sad.

Yeah, just what the drag racing world needs....drag racing Formula 1 style.

#24 02-28-2007, 08:31 PM

Just the other day I was having a conversation with a good friend of mine about limiting testing in the nitro classes. Which I feel should and could be done, it would be a quick fix to alleviate some of the cost, but his point was. It's the cost to make a run with one of these cars is the problem.

Maybe NHRA should come up with a nitro car of tomorrow??...for maybe 2009-2010??

#25 02-28-2007, 08:52 PM

Thanks Nunzio I appreciate that.
Rich

#26 02-28-2007, 09:03 PM

I've got a little bit of a different take.... FWIW

Throw out all the parts, just haul (with proper tags and permits) a car to 23 races, fill it with diesel fuel, fly in a crew, feed the crew, head home, service the car in your garage with rent, utilities, insurance.... you get my point.

Even if you throw out the car and parts and cost to make a hit- it's an expensive sport.

Drag racing, as compared to NASCAR, is a crazy inexpensive sport. We don't have a short track program, and a plate program and a road course program....

The real problem (IMO) is that we have to do a better job communicating with corporate America. Some are scared as soon as you say "motorsports marketing". They think NASCAR at $20MM plus activation cost...

Plus NASCAR has set the bar pretty high - so a sponsor expects a higher level of professionalism from the start - where NASCAR has had decades to grow into that level. PLUS - NASCAR has a vibrant "farm system" with trucks, and Busch cars etc....

We have to do a better job of showcasing the personalities (all of them), we need more drama in each 4 second pass... we need more soap operas (I hate to say it) - we need a farm system to build our personalities of tomorrow.

The cost to race isn't the problem - it's finding and educating middle class corporate America - the sport needs MORE dollars - More DSR's and JFR's and KB's

#27 02-28-2007, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Thurow

Sorry, but that article goes against everything racing is about. The one and only point of drag racing is to get from here to there in the shortest amount of time possible. Period. It's not close competition, it's not keeping it cheap enough for anyone who feels like it to compete. I just don't see all the gloom & doom people like Asher talk about. We've got more than full fields in all classes- what more do you want? Racing, especially drag racing, should be an engineering contest. You want artificial, spec car racing, go watch NASCAR. And by the way, how are their ridiculously restrictive rules working to keep things cheap? Not allowing progress like OHC, 3 plug heads, multispeed blowers, screw blowers in nitro classes, etc. shows that drag racing has lost its way. It should be run what you brung, & hope you brung enough. That's real racing. Unfortunately, some people have to always stand in the way of progress, and that's sad.

Sorry, but I prefer beer and pretzels to wine and cheese. That being the case I would never want to see drag racing become F1.

#28 02-28-2007, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Walczak

We have to do a better job of showcasing the personalities (all of them), we need more drama in each 4 second pass... we need more soap operas (I hate to say it) - we need a farm system to build our personalities of tomorrow.

Some of that showcasing is being done now through such avenues as Driving Force. Melanie Troxel has likewise received a great deal of attention as did Erica Enders a few years ago with her Disney movie. But there are plenty of other personalities in drag racing that likewise deserve attention.

As to the farm system, let me speak a little heresy (for which I fully expect to be crucified). I think the NHRA should seriously consider separating the top alcohol dragsters and funny cars from the Lucas Oil series and give these classes a series of their own (perhaps with pro mods?). Naturally the idea would to be to get a series sponsor that would be able to put more money into the sport making it akin to an NHRA version of NASCAR's Busch series. While a top alcohol series would continue to run both regional and national events, I think a separate series would definitely help in bringing both attention and money to those classes and to drag racing. I mean haven't we all seen ESPN 2 broadcasts of the sportsman series that only showcased the top alcohol cars? The broadcasters obviously know what their viewers want to see. Why not just go ahead and give it to them in the form of a separate series?

#29 02-28-2007, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackee Allen

If you think it's because all of those other people have lost interest in drag racing, you're wrong. They simply CANNOT AFFORD to do it any longer.

In my opinion, drag racing has lost its very essence with the continuing demise of the "independent racer."

Well put Jackee, I miss the days when an independant, or regional racer could show up and make the program...but it's not just the money for parts or expenses. The top teams have raised the bar so much with thier endless testing, and R&D, that it's impossible for someone to roll a car out of thier garage, show up for 3 or 4 events within a close tow, and make any kind of attempt at qualifying. I don't see how to change that with rules??

#30 02-28-2007, 11:07 PM

I talked to a freind of mine last ningt that races one to two events in Top Fuel per year. This is a team that races in Spokane although they want to do a couple more next year. He told me it cost 7,500 a pass in hard money, 1,500 per run in clutch parts alone.

Jon Asher Article

Jon Asher Article

New To Site?

Need Help?