1000 foot racing

[tj34ford]

NHRA just announced they are changing the fuel racing to 1000 feet instead of the 1320 from Denver on

[slowmotion]

I work at a track. We were talking about it the other day. My boss's point of view was that there are no grandstands down that far and people will still see 300 mph on the score boards.
I don't know if they will have add new mph beams at the 1000' or how it will work.

[ashtrak]

I would have to think they would move the beams because a race could be won or lost that extra 320 ft :wink:

[superstreeter]

I for one, am glad they are doing this,,I`d like to see them do this for all the classes,,would be safer for the faster cars, and might let them ease up on some of the safety issues, parachutes and stuff.. its seems to be getting harder to keep the car at the track lately, and this may be a start..

[slowmotion]

I for one, am glad they are doing this,,I`d like to see them do this for all the classes,,would be safer for the faster cars, and might let them ease up on some of the safety issues, parachutes and stuff.. its seems to be getting harder to keep the car at the track lately, and this may be a start..

I'm not sure what class you run. That being said.

Dropping back to 1000' should be no reason to "ease up on safety".
If you have the money to build a fast car, you have the money to spend on safety.
Probably most of the guys on here are bracket racers. You don't have to be the fastest car in the class or torture your equipment to get that extra tenth out of it.

If a guy is blowing up his stuff at the 1250' mark, then backing the finish line to 1000' means as he makes change to get the most out of the pass, he be blowing up at the 900' mark.

I myself just put together an altered. I could've went killer on the engine. Instead it was built to go lots of rounds with reliability and little maintenance.
We're still testing and I hope it runs around 10.00.

[zipper06]

I know this will be an unpopular sinero, but i for one would like everything cut back to 1/8 mile. most accidents occur after the 1/8 mi. mark, most blownup equipment happens after the 1/8 mi. Some tracks that have 1/4 mi. capabilities most times run 1/8 mi. except for big races IE: memphis, in fact there's not one track in Miss. that runs 1/4mi., not many in S.C. or Ala. In the end this saves on accidents, cleanups, and is much safer.
Top fuelers are already running close to 280mph in the 1/8 and only 40 to 50mph the last 1/8mi. while they melt down.
I did see the tape/run in which Scott, died and it appeared to me there were serious problems, soon after the fire. The chutes came out very late, and the car didn't slow down much before hitting the sand, like maybe the throttle was stuck or maybe he was uncounsious long before he got to the end of the track.

These are just my opinions and mine alone.

Zip.

[topcat572]

I agree with Zip. I am not as macho as I once was. Ive ran 1/4 mile for over 30 yrs. The last 2 yrs the only races We ran has been the KOC, which is 1/8 mile and have grown to like it, 135-140 in the 1/8 will get Your attention. Im considering setting up for the 1/8 only now. :wink:

[us7race]

I have maybe a differant opinion on this?.. I think everyone knows all the cars are set-up to be on the edge at the 1/4 mile to get the most out of their pass. Shortening the distance is only going to make them push their cars just as hard as before and be ready to let go 320 feet sooner.
So will it help? I am not so sure how much if any. Of course it will slow down the MPH by a fraction.. Any other opinions on this?

[superstreeter]

Well I think if your going to shorten the distance, the mph and et with both be down, so you`ll have some rpm to spare,and you`ll put more gear in to get back to the same rpm you used to go through top end at,engines will rev up quicker, leave harder, and make less breakage I would say,,I`ve raced 1/4 mile and 1/8, I see way less breakage of parts at the 1/8 mile tracks, than the 1/4 mile ones..I still think its a good idea, as for safety rules,they usually base the rules on how fast you run, which means if your down 10 mph or 1/2 a sec. for example, at top end,,that lets alot of cars off the hook for parachutes alone! just my opinion !

[mark6052]

If nhra cuts back to 1000ft it will not effect the topfuel tune. they will keep the same gears, 3.20s, same revlimiter, etc. they just wont be on final melt down.

[Tod74]

I have maybe a differant opinion on this?.. I think everyone knows all the cars are set-up to be on the edge at the 1/4 mile to get the most out of their pass. Shortening the distance is only going to make them push their cars just as hard as before and be ready to let go 320 feet sooner.
So will it help? I am not so sure how much if any. Of course it will slow down the MPH by a fraction.. Any other opinions on this?

I agree.

I know this isn't the same exact thing, but along the same thought.....whenever a racing organization tries to keep cost down by mandating a minimum weight to eliminate the exotic metals etc...what happens? The top teams STILL use all the light weight expensive stuff and then add the weight where they want it. Doesn't usually solve the cost issue. Speaking mostly of Sprint cars and such...but in this case there would be an added 320 ft to the shutdown..iduno. JMO

[Racefab57]

INTERESTING VIEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! David.

[ashtrak]

I think the bust panels that blow out and pull the chutes is a step in the right direction

[mytmouz]

I don't know that the 320 ft will do much good if the chutes don't work. I doubt many tracks are going to rework the shut down area by removing the asphalt and adding sand in it's place and reworking the return turn offs for a race that only happens once a year at their track...

[slowmotion]

I don't know that the 320 ft will do much good if the chutes don't work. I doubt many tracks are going to rework the shut down area by removing the asphalt and adding sand in it's place and reworking the return turn offs for a race that only happens once a year at their track...

Gateway is already considering removing some of the walls and removing asphalt so they can extend the sandtrap another 57'. That would make it a total of 150'

[mytmouz]

That's one. Take the case of Englishtown where the Kalitta wreck happened. There is a highway on the other side of the wall. If you add to the sand trap by shortening the shutdown area, how is that going to help? If you shorten the length of the race as is being done now, how many tracks besides Gateway are going to expend the funds to accommodate one race? Construction costs are out of sight now, and most tracks cannot afford the expense. It's tough enough to fill the stands now, and raising ticket prices so the fans can see a shorter race is not a good soution, IMO. Most spectators I have questioned want to see a 1/4 race, not half a race...

[slowmotion]

That's one. Take the case of Englishtown where the Kalitta wreck happened. There is a highway on the other side of the wall. If you add to the sand trap by shortening the shutdown area, how is that going to help? If you shorten the length of the race as is being done now, how many tracks besides Gateway are going to expend the funds to accommodate one race? Construction costs are out of sight now, and most tracks cannot afford the expense. It's tough enough to fill the stands now, and raising ticket prices so the fans can see a shorter race is not a good soution, IMO. Most spectators I have questioned want to see a 1/4 race, not half a race...

If you look at it as the total shut down area from the finish line to the catch net, we are not shortening the total shut down area. We are extending the trap so cars have more of that area to get them stopped.
We cannot extend our shut down any farther. Just past our net is a levee and a canal.
And as far as tracks can't afford it doesn't really matter to NHRA. Just like a few years age when NASCAR mandated safer barriers on ovals. Everybody had a deadline that they had to be installed.

Whatever regulations they come up with will only apply to national event tracks. I'm sure that the tracks make a ton of money on that "one race".

[ogles824]

I agree with the 1000 foot rule. I saw it in the early 90's at the Paris (TX) drag strip and it made some really great racing. They cut back because of lack of shut down area. They have since gone to 1/8 mile which has made it even safer. At first I rebelled against 1/8 mile racing and swore to never go to another drag race there or anywhere else where 1/8 mile racing was held. A couple of years ago my son finally talked me into going to Redline @ Caddo Mills, TX. I loved it. It seemed like with the lower gear ratios these folks were running to set up for the 1/8 they were launching a lot harder and this made for some spectacular starts at the tree. Now I can hardly wait until we are campaining a car in N/E on the 1/8 mile. I figure the track owners get a better deal on 1/8 mile insurance because it is safer, which in turn would lower entry fees. With fuel cost effecting every aspect of racing these days we need all the help we can get.

[outlaw256]

sanctioned drag racing has gone the way of rock n roll.whats out there today is called rock but it is just not the same 1/4 to 1/8. 331/3 to cd vhs to dvd rearwheel to frontwheel . i use to love to load the 55 on the trailer and go to racing. but then it went 1/8 and it just seem to lose somsthing. track attendence went way down and drag racing on the levee became the place to be friday nites and sat. nites 30 miles of straight and wide blacktop. 1/4 miles mark all up and down the levee.200ft from the mississippi river no house no police just cars. im starting to get a idea how the gun fighters must have felt at the turn of the centry. change all around some good most bad.

[Bubanator]

I can understand why, cause of safty issues and cause Kalitta was killed going 300mph, but it sort of takes away the whole purpose of the quarter mile, you have less room to catch up. But the ride is only 4 seconds long anyway, you spend about 5 minutes total driving time in the car each year, If it was for super stock or someting thats running slower it would be different, but im sure that the drivers can barely notice the change.

[LarryGhigo]

Back when the engineers, etc. were saying,"it's impossible to run under 7 seconds in the 1/4" and they asked Don Garlits... he said ( the best I remember) the only unbreakable rule is "You can't get there before you leave".
My point is technology will keep improving until some day you can run 400mph in the 1/8. Of course the rules will be very different by then. So, is there an answer? How the Hell Would I know?

[suicidebomb]

OF course "BIG" was right. At least until the SST came out. Then you could land in New York, before you departed Paris.

[gotdragcars]

this sucks....people spent all these years trying to go faster now they want to slow it down....reeeeediculous...nuff said