1000 foot racing

Old 07-03-2008, 10:55 PM
  #11  
Tod74
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,143
Default

Originally Posted by 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?
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
Tod74 is offline  
Old 07-04-2008, 12:46 PM
  #12  
Racefab57
Senior Member
DYNO OPERATOR
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NC
Posts: 557
Default

INTERESTING VIEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! David.
Racefab57 is offline  
Old 07-05-2008, 03:57 AM
  #13  
ashtrak
Senior Member
MASTER BUILDER
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: North East, Maryland
Posts: 159
Default

I think the bust panels that blow out and pull the chutes is a step in the right direction
ashtrak is offline  
Old 07-05-2008, 07:49 AM
  #14  
mytmouz
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
mytmouz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pelahatchie, MS
Posts: 999
Default

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...
mytmouz is offline  
Old 07-05-2008, 09:06 AM
  #15  
slowmotion
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Staunton, IL
Posts: 943
Default

Originally Posted by tporter
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'
slowmotion is offline  
Old 07-05-2008, 10:51 AM
  #16  
mytmouz
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
mytmouz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pelahatchie, MS
Posts: 999
Default

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...
mytmouz is offline  
Old 07-05-2008, 06:14 PM
  #17  
slowmotion
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Staunton, IL
Posts: 943
Default

Originally Posted by tporter
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".
slowmotion is offline  
Old 07-05-2008, 08:20 PM
  #18  
ogles824
Member
MASTER JOURNEYMAN
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 45
Default

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.
ogles824 is offline  
Old 07-06-2008, 12:34 AM
  #19  
outlaw256
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: falkville al
Posts: 1,766
Default

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.
outlaw256 is offline  
Old 07-16-2008, 02:50 PM
  #20  
Bubanator
Junior Member
SHOW GUEST
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1
Default

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.
Bubanator is offline  

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service