You guys think in our lifetime ever going to see a 400 mph Top Fuel lap??.What do you think it will take??.
Printable View
You guys think in our lifetime ever going to see a 400 mph Top Fuel lap??.What do you think it will take??.
Nope! They've been working to slow them down for a couple years already.
It's called liability and the sanctioning body cannot afford any more.
After I posted I did find this article:
Dragsters keep breaking speed barriers
By BOB ARNDORFER
Gainesville Sun staff writer
Kenny Bernstein founded drag racing's 300 Club at the 1992 Gatornationals. Driving a Top Fuel dragster, he was the first person to break through the 300 mph barrier.
Is a 350 or 400 Club next?
Bernstein's feat was the motorsport equivalent of Air Force pilot Chuck Yeager flying through the sound barrier in 1947. They said it couldn't be done.
Today, drag racing speeds in the 320 mph range are routine, and the 330-mph barrier has even been broken; all from a standing start on a quarter-mile track, shorter than the distance between the corner of University and Main and the Seagle Building.
As each milestone speed barrier is breached in drag racing, the question emerges: Just how fast can they go?
Is 350 or 400 even possible?
"Back in the '50s and '60s, they said the laws of physics wouldn't allow you to go 150 miles an hour," said Mike Dunn, another member of the 300 Club who is competing in the Top Fuel class during this weekend's Gatornationals. "I think shortly after they made that statement, somebody broke 150."
Back when the sport was closing in on the magic 300, few people thought it wouldn't happen, Dunn and others said. As the speed records inched up from 250 to 270 to 290 in the 1980s, the question became not if they could go 300, but who would do it.
Nine years after Bernstein broke 300, however, the tone in the pits has changed. Drivers and crews are suggesting that speeds may have peaked. And that, they say, may be good for the sport.
"I think 400 (mph) is technically not impossible," Dunn said. "I don't think we'll see it happen, though. . . . Whether NHRA or the insurance companies would let us run 400 is the question. Obviously, safety is the biggest concern, as it should be."
Three weeks ago in Phoenix, Dunn hit a speed of 328.22 mph, breaking his official career best of 321.42 mph. The 328 wasn't official, however, because Dunn wasn't able in the same event to follow it up with a run within 1 percent of the speed.
The fastest unofficial speed ever recorded in an event sanctioned by the National Hot Rod Association was 330.23 mph. It was set in 1999 by Tony Schumacher, who also is in town competing in the Top Fuel shoot-out. Schumacher's speed is unofficial because he, too, wasn't able to back it up at the same event.
NHRA's fastest official speed is 326.91, set by Gary Scelzi in October 1999.
Dunn said that a decade ago, insurance companies didn't want racers running 300 mph. Changes in NHRA rules and advances in safety technology, he said, helped convince insurers that the risk isn't as great as the speeds suggest.
"Today's cars are safer at 320 than back in 1980 when I was driving Funny Cars at 250," Dunn said.
In an effort to rein in the horsepower, NHRA rules now restrict the size of engines in the top classes to 500 cubic inches. Restrictions also have been placed on the size of superchargers -- the device that blows huge doses of air into an engine -- and the types of ignition systems that can be used.
Another major rule change affected the fuel mixture for the top classes. Instead of gasoline or alcohol, Top Fuel and Funny Cars burn nitromethane, a highly volatile fuel. In the past, NHRA allowed the use of 100 percent nitro in the engines. It delivered enormous power, but also often resulted in engines exploding during a run.
Today the 90 percent rule has been adopted, which mandates that nitro can comprise only 90 percent of the fuel mix, with the remainder made up of less volatile methanol.
Dan Olson, crew chief for Schumacher, has been in drag racing for 36 years. He said he remembers how difficult it was to get into the "200-miler" club.
"They thought there was no way you'd ever go faster than 200," he said.
For most of his three decades in the sport, he thought the sky was the limit. Today, he said, he thinks the technology and rules may have caused speeds to top out. "With what we have today to work with, I don't think we'll see much more than 330 (mph)," Olson said.
Technology today has caused such increases in power that the biggest challenge now is controlling it efficiently. With so much power -- Top Fuel cars have 6,000 horsepower, more than a dozen Corvettes combined -- the trick is keeping the wheels from spinning on the track. A car without traction doesn't win races.
"In the past, we could never overcome the track," Olson said. "Now we've got the power, but the problem is overcoming the track, or keeping the car from spinning its tires."
Tim Richards, co-crew chief with Johnny West for Bernstein's team, said he thinks the new rules will keep speeds in check.
"I think everybody agrees these cars go fast enough to be entertaining," he said. "There was a time when the technology was moving a lot faster than it is today, and there were a lot of big jumps that could be made in speeds.
"Today, I think what we're striving for is more competitiveness and more consistency," said Richards, who started in the sport in the early 1970s when 200 mph was the brass ring. "That's more important than getting a car to 340."
Anthony Vestal, a spokesman for NHRA, said the new rules "sort of slowed down speed a little bit the last year or so." But Dunn's performance in Phoenix, he said, "shows that these guys are mechanical geniuses and they'll figure ways within the rules to achieve the speeds."
Speed is secondary to the main goal in drag racing, Olson said.
"My goal is to win rounds and win races," he said. "The speeds and (elapsed times) will come along."
I really don't think that 400 mph is attainable at 1000 feet but I do believe it's possible in the 1/4. I think it's a stretch as to whether we will ever see 1/4 mile racing again in Top Fuel and Funny Car. NHRA has too many short tracks that are land locked and thus can't be extended to provide the necessary shut off area. Pomona is the best example as there is a golf course at the end of the track so the only way I see that they could provide a longer track is to reposition the track to an angle to where it now exists and I don't think that's going to happen. BTW, I wonder how how golf scores are affected during the Winternationals and the Finals.:eek::3dSMILE::LOL:
Hummm-maybe no one calls out FOUR!!!!.:eek::LOL::LOL:Quote:
Originally Posted by NTFDAY
I have to agree that we won't see it. I believe it is technically possible from the dragster side, but not likely to happen due to track limitations. Even if they built new tracks with longer shut down areas, that would leave the existing tracks to deal with and having the teams switching back and forth between 1000 ft and 1320 ft would not be practical.
Just my opinion, but it ain't gonna happen. If they shortened the track before to prevent going 330, they will take further steps if necessary.
It's not all bad. I went to a lot of 1/8th mile tracks in the '60s-'70s, and loved it! A "good race" is about close competition... not trap speeds.
I have a friend who is pretty heavily involved in nostalgia racing. Today they are only allowing enough nitro to give them some of the cackle, and flames... but nowhere near the percentage makes a lot of power... so they are basically alcohol cars, with a little "show".
There is also the incredible cost of racing fuel cars, and of course the safety issues. If we were losing drivers in the low 300s... there is no way that the sanctioning bodies will allow 400 to happen.
maybe I'll just take up painting-------
some earlier plans
altho they shortened the length to reduce speeds, it was really just to get more stopping room as the cars weren't accellerating much at the top end--
the real problems are equip and stuff setting around at the top end that can be hit by an out of control object-
even with todays cars, if the body work was redone so as to eliminate the rear wing structure, the cars could run maybe 75 mph more and this wouldn't really lower the et's much--but that would be to the 400 mark---
Either that or equip them with a tail hook.:eek::3dSMILE:
Jerry, You don't want to do that! It's too frustrating! :-) ...though you DID have some of the best looking cars ever in the sport!Quote:
Originally Posted by jerry clayton
BTW... I didn't say they couldn't go 400... just that "my opinion" is... that NHRA will interfere if the speeds start jumping too high.
... and I AM amazed that we are almost to 330 again, with 320 feet less track!!! :-o
I've often wondered how fast a T/F or F/C could go if there were NO RULES. But then again what fun would that be if they couldn't make 'em go fast in spite of the rules.
Funny cars are about at there max with looking like a car---there bodies are so much about down force that not much they can do for speed--altho, having said that---drag race is about et--getting there the quickest--if the race was fastest( MPH) there would be many changes and I believe that the funny car speeds could be in the same area as the top fuelers---
The top fuelers is about traction for the ETs also but being overall more aero dynamic, they do have 7-10% more mph in the limited accelleration distance being used
The drawings I posted were done in 1971 and when word got out that I was working on something OUT THERE, some high up people got together and told our sponsers that we wouldn't be allowed to run--this removed sponser help( it was only help back then--after all just how many champion spark plugs or valvoline oil can you use)--
when we did do our rear engine car we soon put wheel pants on the front wheels that were copied from the ones on the LSR car that is now at Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago---
When and if someone was to run for max mph, the fuel curves, clutch and aero wuld have to be reconfiqured a lot, so as to keep traction with less down force(more aero) we would have to limit engine torque to the driveline by not only fuel management but clutch engagement/slippage/lockup and probably just use the clutch (after initial launch) for traction control as the fuel curves would be set up on a curve that allowed max accelleration for distance/time element instead of just a distance factor--
Most Mondays I have lunch with Vance Hunt (Drag Racing List - The Racing Career of Vance Hunt) and a few other old high school buddies of mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by jerry clayton
Needless to say, the quality of the Bee Ess is very high at those gatherings.
Anyway, right after the distance was reduced from a quarter mile to a thousand feet Vance mentioned that an influencing factor in the decision was that most blower/engine failures (I guess you could read that "explosions") occur in the last 300 or 400 feet of the run.
There's gotta be a lot of reasons why 1,000 feet is a good idea.
Jim
The deciding factor to shorten the runs was to pick up stopping distance at tracks where there was no more room---Scott Kalidda got killed because he hit a piece of heavy equipment--
The issue of losing blowers or other parts was simply a $$$ decision by the teams for if they needed to run that hard against who ever was in the other lane and usually one would only do it if he had enough parts to rebuild for the next round--
We always only ran our car to about the 1000 ft area and shut off(but no braking or chute) til the 1320 mark--our speeds were generally in the 208-212 area doing this and when we had to would run in the high 220's( 230 was a big number back then) We held the NHRA national record as well as the track records at most of the tracks we ran and once ran low et at 14 events in a row---We had a lot of basicly single runs as over half of the competitors red lighted against us and the others melted down and/or popped the blowers. Our driver was habitually late against about everybody he ran (watching for there red lite) and our highest mph runs were those that he was chasing down someone.
The mph back then was measured over 130 feet , 65 before and 65 past the 1320 mark so the shut off early runs had low numbers and running it out the back door meant driving it way past the finish line for big numbers here as now the speed is done prior to the finish line---
For fuel cars to even get to 325 they are having a tough time with tires. Even if they were allowed to go 1/4 mile and as fast as they wanted, the tire companies would have to have a tire capable of much higher speeds.
With the majority of tracks on the National Event Tour being built in the days of 200 mph top end cars, many of them can barely handle the 320 mph speeds safely!!!! IMO the move to 1000 ft. was one to save lives and keep top fuel racing going. JMO, but if you want to see speeds higher then what the Top Fuel cars are running now, try a trip to Bonneville!!!! Long track, lots of shutdown area, no walls to bounce off of, no barriers to drive into!!!!!! It's a real tragedy that Scott Kalitta had to die to make the top speed issue something that had to be dealt with.....
Seems that we've maybe lost sight of the concept, and instead of "...who gets there the quickest?" we've become more interested in "....who's fastest?", at least in the top fuel classes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Severson
Well certainly RT's and ET's win races.But then again some have been won based on being run down with mph.Heck-I've lost races because I was mph'er and lost in the top end lights.
quit a few cars win races and don't run more mph than the other guy(girl) cut better light less wheel spin get there quicker