This was posted by Roger Way in another topic. I thought it would bring up some good debate. I'm sure there are a lot of opinions.

SINCE I AM NOT FAMILIAR ENOUGHT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO POST A NEW TOPIC I WILL JUST ASK HERE, AND MAYBE DUANE CAN MOVE TO A NEW TOPIC.  SINCE NHRA HAS NOW BECOME SMART ENOUGH TO MOVE THE FUELERS TO A 1000 FOOT TRACK, DO YOU THINK THAT US BOAT RACERS WILL BE SMART ENOUGH TO FOLLOW OR WILL WE WAIT UNTIL TRAGEDY STRIKES?     ANY INPUT??

This is another knee jerk reaction from the NHRA to a tragic accident that would not have changed the out come of the tragic event, 1000 foot racing would not have saved Blaine,Darrell or Eric.

1320 feet is drag racing and as much as I hate to slow things down, if that is what has to be done to keep traditonal racing as we know it then slow the cars down.

It is a very simple thing to do, simple mandate a compression ratio no more than 6:1 and lower the boost % …and there’s no way the racers would be able to circumvent it.

Initiate a penalty of disqalifying the offender at the event and a loss of point for two or three events yet allowing them to race and there would be nobody cheating after being caught

I personaly think it is long over do.There are so many +s by going 1000 ft. saftey is #1Butt along with that you will get better racing.You wont have so many broken boats that cant return for next round.Tracks that are now marganal would be much safer example Red Bluff.I dont now how fast we are at 1000ft butt we have ran over 220 at the660.MPH is not going to change that much .I wil tell you a TFH that is not accelerating when it is allready at a high MPH is not happy. It is not a matter of time that we will have to do this IT is the time to do this.NOBODY likes change butt this is one we need.                                                          John Haas

this is the posibility with the NHRA not likely to be the case with the boats we are not really running them on kill like the cars are

Mike

In the NHRA this temp. ruling is only in affect for the two fuel catagories all other classes will be running 1320.

That would be my thought also fuel and alchol hydros and maybe the flats.Im not sugestting you change all the classes to 1000 ft.                                       John Haas

Well you know after reading Mr padgetts post and thinking about it Im probably just getting short on Balls. J Haas

That will be the day, John. You may not say much but I don't think anybody can accuse you of insufficient sackage.

Hey Padgett,

What is it about a 1000 foot course you dont like??  Is it just the fact that it is not 1320, or is there some other viable reason?  And as far as no longer supporting NHRA, or their sponsors that is you're choice, that is the beautiful thing about living in America.  Now you will have time to take up golf on sundays.  See ya,  Roger

Greg P. I am with you on this, But I will sit this one out for a while and let you have the target for a while.......LOL

Atleast I still have the NAA/FC for real drag racing

Read this interview with Dale Armstrong on his approach to this subject.

www.competitionplus.com/index.php

Dale Armstrongs article is good and would accomplish slowing the cars down, but what it doesnt talk about is who is going to "police" all this policy?  You would almost need a representative to monitor each car. Not going to happen. Read the newest article regarding the 1000 foot track on NHRA, and you will see it is quickly gaining support from most all the  nitro teams.  My guess is that it will remain in place for quite some time if not indefinite.  Roger

Funny ... TF Tech had already mentioned this yet is blown off, then someone like Dale Armstrong says it NOW all of a sudden its a great idea.....

I read Armstrong's reply about a week and a half ago. Yes that is one way for sure but they could also take away blower overdrive, set the limit at 30% on the overdrive and limit fuel pump volume to say a max of 70gpm instead of 120 gpm like they run now. If you don't have the fuel volume and the air you are not going to run as hard as they are today. So yes I agree with the 1000 ft. racing. I raced at all of those short NHRA tracks back in the late 70's and early 80's when I worked for Frank Bradley on his TF dragster and they were short then, and we were only running 5.70's @ 250 MPH. Just my 2 cents worth, and thats not worth much these days.

Just thinking out loud. How important are the 1/8 mile stats to the sportsman classes.? Could they set up the timing equipment at 1000' and 1/4 instead of 1/8? I know they can easily switch back and forth from 1/8 to 1/4 with the computer so it should be easy to switch from 1000' to 1/4.

Of course I don't have a clue if this is even being considered and I'm mearly participating in this discussion. 

This is being brought up because it is happening in the NHRA, as far as IHBA nothing has been instated @ this time,this is just some people talking.

1/8th mile times are quite important to most all the classes especially the pro classes.

the NHRA has clocks @ 60', 330' ,660' , 1000' & 1320'

I understand the importance of the 1/8 mile to the pro classes in the current format, running the full 1/4. My question is; would (could) the 1000' times replace the 1/8 times after a bench mark was establised?

As far as 60', 330', 1/8, 1000', and 1/4. While ideal, is not logistically feasible in our sport. The amount of effort to set up just one timing tower on the water is greater than setting up a whole course for asphalt. ............ oh wait, they don't have to set up the course for asphalt. It stays set up all the time.

Scott

I know the addional clocks cant be used for boats (logistical reasons)I was just giving an example.

And the other answer is NO the intemedate clocks are needed this is the only way to record how a boats tune up is for the first half of the coarse, if would be even better if we could have additonal incrimental times.

i like this idea better yet

I'm all for shortening up the the start. If im correct the125' start was implemented years ago before separate start timers, Personally as most do now i'm full throttle from the rope so thats 1445' on a 1320' fuse. As hard as we run the Ford nowadays it gets a little hard on it not to mention i wouldn't mind keeping her under 170 one bit!

 Wow I am tore on this subject? Im just gonna keep reading. I cant decide on this one? One question for everyone? If we did shorten the course at the start or the end would more people want to step up to TFH? I think if they did that would be a good thing?

                                                          Mark Workentine

I have a question for those that say do away with the125' , where would the start line be in reference to the hold rope?  If its inches like on the asphalt track could you red light without ever letting go of the rope, say a full rope and a wind behind you I've seen us move up feet with this condition not inches?  Tough to stage but just thinking out loud.

Rick

I just watched the NHRA race from Denver. They polled a lot of big names Don Garlits, Don Prudhome, Kenny Bernstein, John Force, Austin Coil, Alan johnson. They unanimously agreed that moving the course to 1000' was the right move for the immedite future. Lee Beard and Cruz Pedregon had dissenting opinions but didn't completely disagree with the move. Some seemed to imply that it should be permanent and some thought that it should stay that way until there is an effective way to slow the cars down and/or lengthen the tracks.

I don't see us ever having the start line immediately at the front of the boats. As was mentioned, there is to much flexibility in the holding rope position. Maybe a happy mediun, but then there will always be the question of flying over the beams until there is a way to shoot a vertical plane with the lasers at the start. ???

This is a cool subject to talk about, and i do understand most likely things will stay the same. Dont' get me wrong i dont want to run 1000' either. On the same token if i hammer it from the rope and thats the only way i know how i'm running 1445 to the finnish.I Dont know really how to shorten the start to work with every one.Maybe leave the tree and move the start timers 25' from the rope. Now your 1345' but far from 1445 and closer to a true quarter and quite possibly just a little safer.                                                                    

John H.I agree with you.  This is a tuff one for me.  A drag race is 1320.  I remember Eddie Hill sitting one out in protest of a shortened course.  That said, we need to be smart about this.  We've been lucky for a good while. We are not being smart by running  on 2 or 3 maybe 4 of or current tracks.  A couple should be reduced to 1000 feet.  Others shortened until we remove guardrails, trees etc..

I have supported the shortened start or as close as we can get to 1320 for a long time.  This will help but we need to fix these tracks now!

Johnny has this right, 1445 is not 1/4 mile, moving the starting line is a simple solution.  Give it 25' for rope flex, jet skis loading boats, different boat sizes ect.  Put 1 beam low, 1 beam at 4' same pole.  Everyones timing system will work pretty much the same, re layout and surveying would be necessary.  Turn the course at  Red Bluff around and you would have a mile of shutdown.  Some tracks should not be raced at extreme speeds. I love Bakersfield but  you get to the end of the track at 200+mph and there are big trees and picnic tables right in front of you, yikes.  This is Drag Boat Racing not Gladiator School, keeping it as safe as possible is in all our best interests.

Just thinking out loud.