Back to the 1/4 Mile??? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Porkchop
- Start date
OK, toss my 80% idea. The first time 1/4 mile will be run, the 340 barrier will be broken, probably by both T/F and F/C. So what is the next barrier? 350.... How many tracks could handle that speed? Maybe that is why 1000' for some tracks & 1/4 for some. I'd still like to see 1/8 mile at some short tracks, "just cuz". And, I know there are a lot of 1/8 mile tracks but how many could handle 300 MPH? Maybe better to run 1/8 at, say, Columbus. Just my first cup of coffee today ramblin. heh
I think all tracks could go back to the full 1/4. Dom Lagana and plenty of others feel safe going the 1/4 mile at US 131 MSP. I did some work using Google maps and got the following measurements for each track and a few that are not on the tour. All measurements are from the 1/4 mile stripe to the start of the sand or major curve/turn in the case of a few tracks.
US 131 MSP- 2,050'
National Trail- 2,000' (barely)
Englishtown- 2,200'
Pomona- 2,100'
Phoenix- 3,300'
Gainseville- 3,035'
Vegas- 2,500'
Houston- 2,700'
Charlotte- 2,500'
Atlanta- 2,300'
Virginia- 2,800'
Chicago- 2,600'
Topeka- 2,700'
Bristol- 2,300'
Norwalk- 2,150'
Epping- 2,350'
Denver- 2,100' (has uphill incline which assists)
Sonoma- 2,450'
Seattle- 2,400'
Brainerd- 2,600'
Indy- 2,600'
Maple Grove- 2,500'
Gateway- 2,500'
Texas- 2,775'
US 131 MSP- 2,050'
National Trail- 2,000' (barely)
Englishtown- 2,200'
Pomona- 2,100'
Phoenix- 3,300'
Gainseville- 3,035'
Vegas- 2,500'
Houston- 2,700'
Charlotte- 2,500'
Atlanta- 2,300'
Virginia- 2,800'
Chicago- 2,600'
Topeka- 2,700'
Bristol- 2,300'
Norwalk- 2,150'
Epping- 2,350'
Denver- 2,100' (has uphill incline which assists)
Sonoma- 2,450'
Seattle- 2,400'
Brainerd- 2,600'
Indy- 2,600'
Maple Grove- 2,500'
Gateway- 2,500'
Texas- 2,775'
ironpony
Nitro Member
when everything works as it should 2500 feet is OK but when something goes wrong 3000 feet is not enough. at 300MPH the car covers 500 ft/sec.
IMO if nitro racing tracks were spec'd today to be semi safe any PE (professional engineer) they would have at a minimum 3000 feet more likely 5000 feet
IMO if nitro racing tracks were spec'd today to be semi safe any PE (professional engineer) they would have at a minimum 3000 feet more likely 5000 feet
none
Nitro Member
If they go back to quarter mile, the 340 barrier will not be broken, the cars will need to be slowed down by a considerable amount. That's the whole problem/discussion.
Alan
ironpony
Nitro Member
Do they actually have to be slowed down or is the RPM, gear ratio, tire size the limit to top speed. I know they are black tracking the whole way and if they can over come that they might have a little left in MPH.
In theory if they are maxed out there would be no change in MPH going back to 1320 they will get there faster as you stated earlier. Add some wing for down force to eliminate wheel speed but introduce drag which counter acts the traction.
if there is some MPH left why not just take away some gearing ?
I know the tire is the limiting factor now, does anyone know what Goodyears limit is.
Force did a lot of testing at Wright Patterson AFB, landing gear and tire test facility shortly after the Eric Medlen accident. Does anyone know the results ?
WPAFB has a machine that can spin the tire up to speed under full load, it is amazing, they run aircraft tires to failure point.
trying some MOPAR blue font, next HEMI orange......
Z28LT1
Nitro Member
Turn 1 at BIR is the fastest turn in North America. No road racer, car or bike, lifts off the throttle going through that turn. It's wide and banked. There have been plenty of runaway drag cars that have navigated turn 1 and come to a safe stop.
mikebcurve
Nitro Member
I see talk of lowering the nitro percentage. What if nitromethane becomes unaffordable or unavailable? I guess that would solve the issue. I think it's a real possibility down the road. What do you think the reaction would be? Move the alcohols classes up minus injected nitro?
Usual password less 1
Nitro Member
Funny Car takes Turn-1 after chutes fail. | failtalent.com
During first round competition at Brainerd, Minn. Jeff Arend’s chutes fail to open at the end-of-the-run. He continues onto the..
failtalent.com
Well now you're just throwing out a crazy variable, I mean, ANYTHING is possible since we can't predict the future. But fears of nitro being unaffordable and unattainable have been around for decades.
Greggo
Nitro Member
So… the expense thing has been, is, and always will be a part of the sport that we are so passionate about. I don’t think there will ever become a day that anyone will make any money in this sport. The expense is always going to be there.
I think whether we go ¼ mile racing or not, sooner or later, the big elephant in the room is going to have to be addressed and perhaps toying with the idea of a select number of events for the nitro cars to race to the 1320 has brought us here and that is – How do we slow down the beast?
Obviously, things were done as the Funny Cars approached and nearly surpassed the 340 barrier much to the chagrin of some. But let’s face it, no-prep nitro racing is not the way to go. And I think it would be a huge mistake to go 660' racing.
I feel like the Big 3 (DSR, Kalitta, JFR) signed up for assuming a lot of these costs when they started building everything (chassis, engines, superchargers, etc.) no matter what rules packages are thrown their way. I think that what Alan says makes a lot of sense though and that a sudden, drastic change could be more catastrophic for the sport. But my question is: what if some kind of spec change, agreed on by PRO of course, was implemented in a timelier fashion? Perhaps make a change for the effective starting with the 2022 or 2023 season? I realize the cost argument will still be there, but it will give development and testing time, time sell to the independent teams and time for all to cycle through some parts to sell to the lesser funded teams.
I know... I know - this can only makes things better if such a change ends up in an actual cost reduction in the long run.
I think whether we go ¼ mile racing or not, sooner or later, the big elephant in the room is going to have to be addressed and perhaps toying with the idea of a select number of events for the nitro cars to race to the 1320 has brought us here and that is – How do we slow down the beast?
Obviously, things were done as the Funny Cars approached and nearly surpassed the 340 barrier much to the chagrin of some. But let’s face it, no-prep nitro racing is not the way to go. And I think it would be a huge mistake to go 660' racing.
I feel like the Big 3 (DSR, Kalitta, JFR) signed up for assuming a lot of these costs when they started building everything (chassis, engines, superchargers, etc.) no matter what rules packages are thrown their way. I think that what Alan says makes a lot of sense though and that a sudden, drastic change could be more catastrophic for the sport. But my question is: what if some kind of spec change, agreed on by PRO of course, was implemented in a timelier fashion? Perhaps make a change for the effective starting with the 2022 or 2023 season? I realize the cost argument will still be there, but it will give development and testing time, time sell to the independent teams and time for all to cycle through some parts to sell to the lesser funded teams.
I know... I know - this can only makes things better if such a change ends up in an actual cost reduction in the long run.
Porkchop
Nitro Member
So, Nascar doesnt make sence because they run short tracks, road course and super speedways???
Porkchop
Nitro Member
Leave the nitro at 90 (85% killed the cranks) Lower compression, lower the max on wing angle, put a lower MAX on the supercharger. None of this would cost much $$$ NHRA needs to grow a pair and say "This is what we are doing, dont like it dont race!" You could play with the rev limiters and make them so they dont kill the motor when it hits. No matter what is done, not everyone will like the decision. Be it 1/4 mile or 1000 foot
TooTall999
Nitro Member
Do you actually think crew chiefs wouldn't be trying to run as hard as possible to the 1320? You give them another 320' and they're going to use it.
Z28LT1
Nitro Member
Looks like you could have taken it a little faster, maybe coast all the way back to the pits. Haha!Funny Car takes Turn-1 after chutes fail. | failtalent.com
During first round competition at Brainerd, Minn. Jeff Arend’s chutes fail to open at the end-of-the-run. He continues onto the..failtalent.com
ironpony
Nitro Member
yes but
if engine rpm is 8250
trans 1:1
rear end 3.2:1
tire radius 23 loaded
MAX MPH is 352.8 so no matter how far you go it can not go faster. each .1 increase in rear end ratio drops MPH by 10 mph
Luke Nieuwhof
Nitro Member
In the last year or so of quarter mile racing in Australia there were a few clockings up around 336mph. The rumor was that Goodyear weren't so sure about their tires continuing to be used at that speed and distance. So I can only guess that quarter mile in the USA would have to see the cars toned back.
Mikey
Nitro Member
Obviously it can be done....They way I see it is all the same parts can still be used. Just have to have limiting factors maybe. Maybe make it where testing is limited to keep the spending down. Maybe the good that comes out of it is say Palmer, Lagana, Mcmillen, or Joe Blow shows up with a 1/4 mile tune up and wins....Well guess what, you have new winners instead of the same ole same ole. Just try it at one race and see. Looks like the Lagana's can do it. I think it be cool to have a couple 1/4 miles races just to mix it up a bit. Not that the racing isn't close the way it is. This is just my opinion, but I think some of the drivers against it are maybe saying that to be politically correct for maybe sponsors or owners sake, but deep down would like to try 1/4 mile again. Again just my opinion. Grant it I've only been 6.40's in the 1/4, but most of our races are 1/8th mile and it feels good the times we get to leg it out the whole 1/4.
