Thread: Looks like the deal is off...........

Tweet

............on selling the pro drag racing portion of NHRA;

http://www.sema.org/Main/ArticleDeta...ontentID=59036

What do you think the long term effect of that announcement will be, Uncle Bob?

I talked to Jeff Byrd today and he said they did not like the fact that Bruton had so much control of the NHRA and schedule. They should just sell it to him

Originally Posted by NTFDAY

What do you think the long term effect of that announcement will be, Uncle Bob?

Tough one to noodle without inside info. First, my gut doesn't quite buy the "bad economy" line. My first inclination is that old line board members didn't like doing the split, but that the announcement didn't want to disclose a political agenda. Might be related to 'burghs comment. Or, in doing acquisition due diligence HD found some info that made them nervous about the future viability, or the cost to keep it viable. Pro drag racing might be on the verge of some serious financial issues (totally speculation). Again, this is not something that the parties would want to admit in a press release.

If the honchos at NHRA aren't good enough promoters to bring in a big time sponsor for the series that could end up being a big problem. It appears,NASCAR had to work pretty hard to come up with a sponsor the size of Nationwide for the former Busch Series, and they've got much more public appeal (despite shrinking ratings) than does NHRA. Time will disclose what's really going on if the press release is obfuscating.

I just checked the entry list for Pomona and there are 14 cars entered in Top Fuel, 18 in Funny and 23 in Pro Stock. I realize that that is not set in stone, but I have to wonder since this is the first race of the year.
I've read about the funding requirements for one or any of the Pro categories and you better have some pretty deep pockets. I wonder if we have passed the apex in the pro categories?
I once thought that a 5.39 or 5.40 at 340 or better was attainable in Top Fuel, but...................

That's a little thin for top fuel with only a week to go. And almost a quarter of the entries for Funny are from one team (assuming JFR is entering 4).

You're old enough to remember the write ups on the "200 mph barrier" I'll bet.

I remember that sometime in the late '50's some fellow with a slide rule determined that 150 or 160 or somewhere around those numbers (my memory isn't as good as it used to be) was the going to be the top attainable speed in a quarter mile. I believe that Garlits or Chris or maybe Eddie Hill surpassed his prediction before he could put the thing back in his pocket.

Originally Posted by NTFDAY

I just checked the entry list for Pomona and there are 14 cars entered in Top Fuel,...........

There were 57 Top Fuel entries trying to qualify for 32 positions at the '69 U.S. Nationals .............. and we now have 14 entries for a major race .......... becoming a business has done sooooo much for this sport ........... no wonder the deal fell through

It was an MIT professor who said it was "physically impossible" for a wheel driven vehicle to exceed 150 MPH in a standing start 1/4 mile.

And as stated above, literally before he put his slide rule away a car called the "Bustle Bomb" went 151 MPH!!

How many of you remember the car? It had a Caddy up front driving through a 3 speed trans and an Olds in the back with direct drive.

Or maybe the Olds was up front and the Caddy in the back....what the hell, I'm old!!

it was called off because somebody up above was watching

Hmmmm. Call em up and make them and offer Uncle Bob!!!! Put me in for half, long as it isn't more then about $138.00! Been a tough month, ya know......

Wow!! You and Warren Buffet.........who'd a thunk it!!

Was hopin' I could get Bill to kick in, but he just offered twice as much for Yahoo as it's worth so he's probably tapped out now.

I was thinking that it was Jim McFarland who calculated a 200 MPH maximum speed in the quarter. I could be wrong. Whoever wrote it later said his error was in the coefficient of friction between the tire and the pavement.

I remember in my first attempt at engineering back in the very early 60's approaching the mechanical engineering professor with the clipping of someone going over 150 mph. He promptly dismissed it as bad timing equipment. shortly after that I hit him with Cook and Bedwell going 166. Then Garlits going 170+. He said absolutely impossible. Furthermore he added if I continued interest in this absurd and abominal automotive craze, it would be absolutely impossible for me to graduate in engineering. Unfortunately he proved correct on the last note. At least for the next few years untill I tried engineering again. haha. A little more mature attitude this time around.

By this time the tire traction theory had been proven to some extent and further mathematical formulas had been developed that we still use today to calculate hp and mph. I actually made a quite involved presentation for a class project along this line. Got a 6 credit A too. hoot hoot.

Today there still are naysayers that claim the limits have been reached. I don't think so but I think we will run out of cars before that happens. We are down to only 14 at national events?? I can remember running our fuel and gas cars in 16 car shows when there were 35 or more cars entered.

I remember heading back to school in '66 and hearing that Pete Robinson had just broken into the 5's for the first time, and getting back to the dorm and having guys declare that it was not physically possible to be that quick!! Calculations show that a car cannnot go that fast!! Like you said, we get to thresholds that are declared unbreakable, and then another breaktrough in technology pushes past the limits.